The Settlers: New Allies

 PC
User Score
2.6

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 98 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 98
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 98
  3. Negative: 76 out of 98

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. nikt455
    Jun 13, 2023
    4
    This is full game and early access content. Game is no completed. AI no exists.
  2. KannelPL
    Feb 19, 2023
    4
    Settlers: New Aliens, a game we have been eagerly anticipating, has ultimately left us feeling disappointed. The game shows potential, but it is hidden behind numerous issues and strange decisions. What surprised me the most is that, in this game, both the multiplayer mode and the storyline are very weak, whereas in a real-time strategy game, it is typically the multiplayer mode that isSettlers: New Aliens, a game we have been eagerly anticipating, has ultimately left us feeling disappointed. The game shows potential, but it is hidden behind numerous issues and strange decisions. What surprised me the most is that, in this game, both the multiplayer mode and the storyline are very weak, whereas in a real-time strategy game, it is typically the multiplayer mode that is the driving force of the gameplay.. Unfortunately, this mode is plagued with problems such as desynchronization, which causes everyone to get kicked out after just 30 minutes of gameplay. Additionally, the lack of the ability to create lobbies or custom games in multiplayer mode is frustrating. While this game does have potential, it seems that the developers' focus was more on creating a store for microtransactions and skins rather than addressing the game's issues… Expand
  3. TheTruthIsHarsh
    Feb 23, 2023
    4
    Meh, zu wenig Siedler und die ganze produktionsketten sind ein Witz, und oft nur optional.
    Für ein RTS zu langsame Mechaniken und zu wenig verschiedene Einheiten und für ein Siedler zu wenig Siedler.
  4. Stik_Figure
    May 1, 2023
    4
    The Slog: New Boredom

    Combat: The Settlers is an overly easy RTS. This game literally requires zero thought in combat. It is pretty simple. Do you have more units than the enemy? Then you win. Amassing an army that can conquer the map is effortless. Gathering: Get used to the same buildings and roads over, and over, and over...Nothing upgrades, nothing can be made more powerful aside    The Slog: New Boredom

    Combat: The Settlers is an overly easy RTS. This game literally requires zero thought in combat. It is pretty simple. Do you have more units than the enemy? Then you win. Amassing an army that can conquer the map is effortless.

    Gathering: Get used to the same buildings and roads over, and over, and over...Nothing upgrades, nothing can be made more powerful aside from assigning an extra resource to it. Everything is cheap to make, nothing takes effort.

    The Story: Is a joke. Who is writing these games for Ubisoft? Fire them. "Hey there, just us oppressed Settlers,, the good guys cause we said so. Now lets go to a new island, amass an army, and slaughter every living person on it. Poor us." Just laughable.

    Overall: It's another identity-less, watered down, Ubisoft product. Bad design. Contrivances that take the place of difficulty spikes. Boring attempt at and underdog story. Just bad at every level, especially a few hours in when you realize, this is it. This is all you are getting for the rest of the game.

    No Thanks.    … Expand
  5. ENAK
    Feb 19, 2023
    3
    I don't get this game. Is it Settlers? Is it Age of Empires? Is it a mobile game? Regardless - nobody seems to have notice that it even came out. No reviews from the press, nobody playing it... Why did they even make this game?!? :)
  6. Avadon
    Mar 5, 2023
    3
    This could have been a good game, but unfortunately it feels like a game where different developers wanted to take it in different directions and they fought, but nobody won, so it ended up a mish mash of half baked features. The campaign is a snoozefest, soldiers have like 3000 ms built in lag before responding to any command, it's full of bugs, save game stops working, multiplayer isThis could have been a good game, but unfortunately it feels like a game where different developers wanted to take it in different directions and they fought, but nobody won, so it ended up a mish mash of half baked features. The campaign is a snoozefest, soldiers have like 3000 ms built in lag before responding to any command, it's full of bugs, save game stops working, multiplayer is broken and desyncs, crashes, basically the multiplayer is unplayable.

    The only good part of the game is Hardcore Mode, where you can play skirmish maps with modifiers which rotate weekly, with allies in co-op. Unfortunately, the game doesn't auto matchmake you with an ally for these challenges. No big deal, you can ask around in the game's discord, right? Well, no. The game doesn't have a discord. You have to browse the forums and find some unofficial fan discords.

    Overall, nobody seems to care about this game. Ubisoft barely promoted it, the developers are pretty much absent, it's missing basic features, and is broken in many ways. It doesn't feel like Ubisoft expects you to buy this game, it feels like they expect you to pay a month of Ubi+ subscription, try it, realize it's bad and then uninstall it. Just casual mitigation of the financial losses that they had when it became clear that the development wasn't going anywhere. I hope they at least fix the multiplayer connectivity problems before they drop it like a hot potato, which is clearly what they want to do as soon as possible, so the few players that actually like it can at least play it sometimes.    … Expand
  7. Tubey
    Feb 18, 2023
    3
    Five plus years of development and this is the net result...

    I can't even put into words my disappointment; this was one of my most anticipated games since 2018 and it's a calamity. It looks OK visually, but everything else - everything - is a disaster. It's like the developers skim read a Wikipedia entry about the series and decided to just plow on making the most basic, uninspired RTS    Five plus years of development and this is the net result...

    I can't even put into words my disappointment; this was one of my most anticipated games since 2018 and it's a calamity. It looks OK visually, but everything else - everything - is a disaster. It's like the developers skim read a Wikipedia entry about the series and decided to just plow on making the most basic, uninspired RTS imaginable and slap the Settlers name on it.

    A question for you, Ubisoft - how can you monetise a game with in-game transactions when the game is so god-awful that nobody with half a brain could tolerate more than an hour of it?

    Thankfully I've got Settlers II to get the bad taste out of my mouth from this - yeah it may be around 17+ years old at this point but it has 100x the heart and gameplay of this modern trainwreck.

    3/10, it should be a 2 for the graphics alone but it's also mechanically... fine I guess, it's just that it's a terrible actual game, so I give it a 3. But it's SO disappointing it's honestly tempting to just slap a zero on it out of disgust. Bah.    … Expand
  8. BeCaEmRe
    Feb 19, 2023
    3
    Gute Grafik,schönes Spiel wenn nicht alle paar Minuten Abstürze da wären ! Viel Geld für für Ärger
  9. P4t1
    Feb 21, 2023
    3
    hello, first the game isnt 60 euro worth...the big price is a shame, i understand after the long time , they need much money to come in green zone by money, but this game is maybe 30 euro worth only....
    multiplayer dosent work to many disconnects and crashes, multiplayer are to slow for RTS and the game have not enough economy machanics for a economy simulation game...the game whant to be    hello, first the game isnt 60 euro worth...the big price is a shame, i understand after the long time , they need much money to come in green zone by money, but this game is maybe 30 euro worth only....
    multiplayer dosent work to many disconnects and crashes, multiplayer are to slow for RTS and the game have not enough economy machanics for a economy simulation game...the game whant to be between the settlers 2 and 4 but its a big fail....if you like economy management, with a loittle bit fighting play settlers 2 if you like more RTS games play settlers 4....but settlers new allies, is the badest settlers every time in my oponion....if the game drops in a sale to 20-30 euros maybe its okay to buy but you become a very slow game and there are other settler titles, where much better as this new one. dont buy it! its the money not worth!    … Expand
  10. SquerQ
    Feb 19, 2023
    2
    Very simplistic mechanics, unnecessary RTS elements, poor story in the campaign ... Not such a new installment I expected :/
  11. FredDie86
    Feb 20, 2023
    2
    Now I get why they didn't really market this game and didn't want reviews on release...game is dumbed down joke..there are mobile games more complex than this. Crazy that same company did Anno 1800, which is great (even though it costs like 200E with all the DLCs). 2 points for the nice visuals.

    Games these days are just garbage, especially AAA.
  12. UselessMate
    Feb 22, 2023
    2
    The Game wants to be a fast and dynamic RTS but fails because the economy part takes too long and is too slow for that type of game design. But for base build game it is too shallow. Food totally optional and you end up buildung houses all the time and one production chain for millitary. Also place the overpowered towers and you are done. Thats not what settlers about. It would be anThe Game wants to be a fast and dynamic RTS but fails because the economy part takes too long and is too slow for that type of game design. But for base build game it is too shallow. Food totally optional and you end up buildung houses all the time and one production chain for millitary. Also place the overpowered towers and you are done. Thats not what settlers about. It would be an enjoyable game if they would at more economy elemets and more variaty in millitary units. But in the current state this is an abomination to what settlers once stood for.… Expand
  13. Zoolis
    Feb 19, 2023
    2
    its a "ok" game, i would say its 30% settlers and 70% age of empires.
    Looks nice and the gameplay was smooth.
    The single player game was quite ok but i bought it for skirmish and it failed horribly there. No options whatsoever to customize your game, the only thing you could choose was 1vs1, 2vs2 and 4vs4 and what empire you would like to play. No choosing of map, difficulty, resource    its a "ok" game, i would say its 30% settlers and 70% age of empires.
    Looks nice and the gameplay was smooth.
    The single player game was quite ok but i bought it for skirmish and it failed horribly there.
    No options whatsoever to customize your game, the only thing you could choose was 1vs1, 2vs2 and 4vs4 and what empire you would like to play. No choosing of map, difficulty, resource options or anything like that.
    Never tried PvP.    … Expand
  14. haszczu
    Feb 20, 2023
    2
    Huge disappointment. Even bigger because I haven't played beta. With different name: 5 I would say. Graphic is nice (except ugly models in cutscenes). It's also kind of fun until you realize how limited number of buildings we got and how unbalanced and poor economy is. I know The Settlers series evolved through years but yh... it's not a matter of wrong choices, this game is unfinished,Huge disappointment. Even bigger because I haven't played beta. With different name: 5 I would say. Graphic is nice (except ugly models in cutscenes). It's also kind of fun until you realize how limited number of buildings we got and how unbalanced and poor economy is. I know The Settlers series evolved through years but yh... it's not a matter of wrong choices, this game is unfinished, unbalanced and broken in soo many aspects.… Expand
  15. lambass147
    Feb 24, 2023
    2
    I'm big fan of Settlers but If you wanna spend money on Settlers game go and buy Settlers 2,3 and 4. Dont waste your money on this garbage with mix of all known great strategy games. AI are bad as it can be mostly beacuse of routes and storage places - settlers always grab items near of them and not near from production building or storage - example - i had stone miner builded i build goldI'm big fan of Settlers but If you wanna spend money on Settlers game go and buy Settlers 2,3 and 4. Dont waste your money on this garbage with mix of all known great strategy games. AI are bad as it can be mostly beacuse of routes and storage places - settlers always grab items near of them and not near from production building or storage - example - i had stone miner builded i build gold mine with 1 space from that stone mine and my settlers grab stones on gold mine from the furthest storage place. next thing is in-game cash, why we should spend any money on sorry for that word stupid visuals in our beloved Settlers game ? This thing should not be in game at all. Mostly disappointing is campaign we waited so many years for just 12 missions? That is really sad. In last the game is at it is you cant change any settings in game (except damm skins) you can't set difficulty you canť pick your map (its's always random) you just can't do nothing just play their game and spend your money.… Expand
  16. Icemelt
    Feb 21, 2023
    1
    They should have just called it "Age of Settlers," because that's all it is.

    Redesigned from the ground up, huh? More like, copied the most basic RTS design and used the Settlers brand to sell it. I have a feeling this game will be record-breaking. That is, record-breaking number of REFUNDS because of the false advertising. What a joke! It also makes me really wonder about so    They should have just called it "Age of Settlers," because that's all it is.

    Redesigned from the ground up, huh? More like, copied the most basic RTS design and used the Settlers brand to sell it. I have a feeling this game will be record-breaking. That is, record-breaking number of REFUNDS because of the false advertising.

    What a joke!

    It also makes me really wonder about so called "professional" reviews. Are these people being PAID to rate games well, or are they just oblivious to the franchise in general? It makes me wonder if they're even gamers at all. It makes me wonder if they even PLAYED THE GAME!?

    One point for graphics. That's it.    … Expand
  17. Exanthius
    Feb 20, 2023
    1
    As a long time Settlers fan who started with Settlers II in 1996 I can't even find the right words for my disappointment with this latest entry in the series. After the rocky beta and a lot of player feedback I was expecting that they would put that feedback to good use and listen to the fans. But after they announced that they would not send out review copies, I got worries. If aAs a long time Settlers fan who started with Settlers II in 1996 I can't even find the right words for my disappointment with this latest entry in the series. After the rocky beta and a lot of player feedback I was expecting that they would put that feedback to good use and listen to the fans. But after they announced that they would not send out review copies, I got worries. If a publisher does not want outlets to test and report on their game before it launches, it's pretty clear what's going on. Being a huge fan, I still bought it and hoped for the best.

    Unfortunately, the game falls short in every aspect. Where older titles had complex wares that needed to be manufacturer, managed and distributed, this game has a very simplistic way of handling resources. When it comes to the Settlers games, this is the most barebone of resource management. There is barely any challenge involved with it.

    The features of the game are extremely lackluster and makes me wonder where all the development time went. Only 13 missions, no map generator, no map editor, the already mentioned most basic resource system and a weird combat system that does not really fit the series are some of the game's shortcomings.

    In addition to that, the game has severe technical issues and that might be one of the strongest reasons why they didn't want anyone to see how the "finished" game plays before launch. The game crashes very often and due to the terrible auto save feature I constantly lose a lot of progress.

    The graphics are disappointing, too. It looks like a game that might have come out a few years ago. I don't understand why they did not use a more modern engine. Although I must admit I have no problem with the graphical style itself. It's cute.

    All in all it's a 1/10 for me as a settlers fan. It might be fun for others, but to me it looks like a cheap use of the settlers IP for a quick cash crab. Although it is very disappointing that the game shows how little heart and care they put into their product and how little they cared about a game that is at least playable from a technical point of view.    … Expand
  18. GandalfCzarny
    Feb 19, 2023
    1
    What do you expect? A good game, made by people who care? Oh please. This is Ubisoft game.
  19. OrdoMalleus
    Feb 23, 2023
    1
    What a shame. I am and was a big fan of the settlers. I started as a child and really love it. And now? Is is definitly not an RTS, the RTS part is very weak an unbalanced. And sadly it is not an building simulation ever. It is only bad, and buggy just really sad so see what happened to this series..
  20. Eskylious
    Feb 20, 2023
    1
    To carry the name of The Settlers and provide gameplay this shallow is incredibly saddening. They removed the requirement of food for your people. Shortened production lines. Made military recruitment and combat single unit based instead of squads. Finally removed any social aspect from your population. They tried very hard to be the next Action RTS with an IP that was never intended to beTo carry the name of The Settlers and provide gameplay this shallow is incredibly saddening. They removed the requirement of food for your people. Shortened production lines. Made military recruitment and combat single unit based instead of squads. Finally removed any social aspect from your population. They tried very hard to be the next Action RTS with an IP that was never intended to be such. They get points for the visuals, it looks pretty. But after about an hour you'll realize looks are all it has going for it. Ultimately with constant crashes, lackluster gameplay, server side connection issues and day one MTX. its not worth your time. Instead you'll get an itch to go play Anno 1800, which at this point, does Settlers better than Settlers.… Expand
  21. MaDiz
    Feb 18, 2023
    1
    It has as much to do with the original IP "The Settlers" as Rainbow Six Extraction with Tom Clancy. Exactly nothing. (Ok, R6E has the character Names...) The original Settlers was a unique piece of art. And everybody who played it, loved it for exactly this. The main goal was never the military. You played Settlers, building your town. find coal, gold, iron, and make your people happy. ItIt has as much to do with the original IP "The Settlers" as Rainbow Six Extraction with Tom Clancy. Exactly nothing. (Ok, R6E has the character Names...) The original Settlers was a unique piece of art. And everybody who played it, loved it for exactly this. The main goal was never the military. You played Settlers, building your town. find coal, gold, iron, and make your people happy. It was more a Settlement Building Strategy Game. This is the try hard of doing a "modern" RTS with "The Settlers". The 1 Point is for the visuals which look nice/ok but there are -9 points for literally raping the name "Settlers" but hey, what do you expect from Ubisoft?… Expand
  22. claddd
    Feb 18, 2023
    1
    This is NOT a settlers game....
    This an "Age of" copy
    => Misleading branding
  23. Dansk_vand
    Feb 19, 2023
    1
    it's a pretty bad story, it's a pretty bad campaign and I don't know if any others have the same problem but my game is crashing from time to time and when you got 500 settlers and make a big trade you just gonna sit and wait and it god damn annoying how you place buildings (Sorry for grammar mistakes english is not my first language)
  24. Revieweevil
    Feb 19, 2023
    1
    Avoid. This is an empty cash grab. Pretty graphics and little else with respect to game play, fun. Surprising it was released as it does not look fixable.
  25. Wiredness
    Feb 19, 2023
    1
    Probably the slowest paced most boring game I have ever played. Hard to even get through the tutorial.
  26. Finn883
    Feb 27, 2023
    1
    The game does not deserve the name The Settlers. It gets boring very quickly and has no depth. It is not a real Settlers game and not a real RTS like Age of Empires. Only 1 point because of the pretty graphics.

    After Volker Wertich rightly left the project, the game was doomed. Because then the wrong decisions were made by people who don't understand The Settlers. They try to get the    The game does not deserve the name The Settlers. It gets boring very quickly and has no depth. It is not a real Settlers game and not a real RTS like Age of Empires. Only 1 point because of the pretty graphics.

    After Volker Wertich rightly left the project, the game was doomed. Because then the wrong decisions were made by people who don't understand The Settlers. They try to get the maximum profit out of it. Keep the game simple, ingame shop with real money and console versions. A console version is basically not wrong, but only if the game does not lose depth in development for it.

    Pioneers of Pagonia will enter early access on Steam at the end of 2023. The new building strategy game by Volker Wertich, the father of The Settlers. Wait for this game, it's worth it!

    If you can't wait, play The Settlers 7 History Edition or Settlers 3 & 4 with the settlers-united fan patches: multiplayer lag fixes, better AI, new maps, real new HD graphics and more.
    But please, don't by this game.    … Expand
  27. jberry
    Feb 28, 2023
    1
    very disappointing game... I was baited by the name but it's totally different than I expected. I loved to play settler 1-4 and I still love to play anno 1800 but this game is more like a early access indie game than a building economy game with a little military action. It's more a bad military action game with a bit of building and economy... I don't understand why they changed the corevery disappointing game... I was baited by the name but it's totally different than I expected. I loved to play settler 1-4 and I still love to play anno 1800 but this game is more like a early access indie game than a building economy game with a little military action. It's more a bad military action game with a bit of building and economy... I don't understand why they changed the core gameplay mechanics of this franchise...… Expand
  28. JohnLSD
    Mar 1, 2023
    0
    Not a builder anymore. It's oversimplified and dumb downed. It has no depth and there is nothing to do except to wait. It's also full of bugs and glitches. But the worst part, there is a settlers limit of 500, even in Settlers 2 you could have more than that. The combat is mega clanky, each time you move a unit it will stop for a second while the enemy hits it. The story, for retardedNot a builder anymore. It's oversimplified and dumb downed. It has no depth and there is nothing to do except to wait. It's also full of bugs and glitches. But the worst part, there is a settlers limit of 500, even in Settlers 2 you could have more than that. The combat is mega clanky, each time you move a unit it will stop for a second while the enemy hits it. The story, for retarded kids. The campaign, with tone of crazy chores. You always have to do all kind of mission objectives, why cant i just play the game, why cant i just relax, why do i always have to do **** to be able to carry on? this game is broken on so many levels that it's impossible to fix with DLC's. And why do i have to buy DLC's to be able to play and enjoy a game that i have already bought?… Expand
  29. Vertran187
    Feb 19, 2023
    0
    Over simplified bad AI not as good a previous games id even say the original was a better game. Ubisoft just don`t care anymore zero effort or zero talent don`t waste your money.
  30. calmon
    Mar 4, 2023
    0
    Happens when you think all the nice elements of old settlers is to complicate for mass market and make everything more simple and not-settle-like.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

24
#24 Most Discussed PC Game of 2023

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
54

Mixed or average reviews - based on 23 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 23
  2. Mixed: 18 out of 23
  3. Negative: 4 out of 23
  1. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jan 23, 2024
    40
    The game looks like a mobile game for the little ones, where production chains and military units have been kept to a minimum. Most of the options start and end on a chronic shortage of wood, and food isn't even considered an essential ingredient. [Issue#326]
  2. GameCritics
    Aug 11, 2023
    10
    The Settlers: New Allies is the latest entry in a beloved and longstanding franchise, and carries an inherent advantage of starting with a greatly successful formula. However, there simply aren’t any exciting updates or formula explorations here. The buggy quality of the code at time of review and utterly flat narrative are salt in the wound, resulting in a game that does not boast a single positive reason to warrant a purchase.
    Read full review
  3. Wccftech
    Apr 16, 2023
    50
    The Settlers: New Allies isn't quite the return to Settlers that fans of the franchise would want. Shallow across all areas, with basic city-building and very basic strategy elements, held together by an average narrative. It's not a bad game, but it's also not good.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »