The Settlers: Rise of an Empire

 PC
  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Sep 25, 2007
User Score
7.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 56 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 32 out of 56
  2. Mixed: 18 out of 56
  3. Negative: 6 out of 56
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. Sirik_Matak
    Apr 11, 2016
    6
    It's a surprisingly competent little city builder. It's the last game from the Settlers franchise I played chronologically, being extremely disappointed with the 5th one (what a wreck) and The Settlers 7. I have to say that Settlers 6 positively striked my conciousness after few games in a row. Although it's not the Settlers game I still wait for, it's a strong enough title to keep meIt's a surprisingly competent little city builder. It's the last game from the Settlers franchise I played chronologically, being extremely disappointed with the 5th one (what a wreck) and The Settlers 7. I have to say that Settlers 6 positively striked my conciousness after few games in a row. Although it's not the Settlers game I still wait for, it's a strong enough title to keep me interested in for more than a few custom games.
    There's a lot to hate and criticise in Settlers 6: the overall art-direction, **** UI and camera movement, problems with structure placing and inability of your settlers to take care of themselves where you hit the greater amount of them and your town grows up to be a bigger city. The most glaring gameplay issue is the expansion and resource planning. Say goodbye to exploring the map and sending geologists into mountains. When you enter a new zone, you get all info on a plate - deers are here, fish are here, iron is here, stone is here. There's some cattle/ship. Build an outpost and get it all to your town. It surely spoils the game itself.
    Although the production chains are simpler than in the classic Settlers before the 5th, your settlers have demands - more of them with each development level of your city and with each promotion of your knight (a hero that grants small bonuses and a different active skill). Overall, you have enough to build and oversee to keep you invested.
    The military layer of the game lacks magic from Settlers 3-4, but in exchange you get siege equipment, torches which keep the things varied enough. It's not the Settlers 5's spam units or the AI will flood you and it's not the "click attack and see what happens" we got in the Settlers 7.

    If you're looking for more classic Settlers, you won't find it here. But Settlers 6 are still decent enough on their own to grant you 20+ hours of entertainment.    … Expand
  2. ScottDinin
    Aug 26, 2009
    9
    This game is amazing for people who like a city builder RTS. I think it should have gotten a much better rating but i do understand the that most players would, including me, would prefer more action than just fighing bandits. Besides that the game is gorgeous and very fulfilling to see your little settlement turn into a huge city.
  3. Excalibur
    Oct 17, 2007
    9
    A nice, entertaining, easy to play, game for the non hardcore fan of the city builder genre!
  4. pete9239
    May 23, 2015
    10
    Amazing game with good features. I first got my hands on this game when i was about 8 years old and I have now played this game for years. I can highly recommend this game
  5. JoshF.
    Oct 20, 2007
    6
    Not very good at all. It gets repetative after 2 skirmish games. I say buy it used or forget about it. I am cutting my lossed after buyig this dreck and the bug-ridden mess that is The Settlers 2 the 10 Anniversary.
  6. JM
    Oct 1, 2007
    8
    I would have liked to seen more resources and manufactured goods, other than that a very good game.
  7. tomoliop
    Nov 23, 2012
    6
    Basically my first contact with the series and a rather unpleasant surprise. Unbelievably lame story and characters (so infantile) and the gameplay itself is kinda... after 10 missions I feel like i keep doing the same **** so I'm gonna drop this, this is a very weak 6/10.
  8. datus
    Jun 28, 2013
    9
    In the world of media, fans of a genre or a specific franchise can sometimes be more of a hindrance to it's success than the rest of us. I'm saddened to see some negative perspectives on this game. Myself, being new to the Settlers series, and this being the first Settlers game I've played, I was hugely impressed with the scope of Settlers 6. I've been playing PC games since the UltimaIn the world of media, fans of a genre or a specific franchise can sometimes be more of a hindrance to it's success than the rest of us. I'm saddened to see some negative perspectives on this game. Myself, being new to the Settlers series, and this being the first Settlers game I've played, I was hugely impressed with the scope of Settlers 6. I've been playing PC games since the Ultima days and I can honestly say that I haven't been this addicted to a game since Ultima 7. Not that I'm comparing this to Ultima 7 but, my point is is that this is not just an RTS, or a city building game. In fact I don't really think you can pigeonhole this game.

    To summarize. You have to gather resources before you can build anything, and you're free to control your hero and explore the map to find such resources (and sometimes treasure). Your settlers can harvest wood, stone, and iron. Your settlers can hunt game, fish, and raise livestock including sheep and cattle which, they can sheer and milk respectively. You can then process those materials accordingly, by setting up cheese or tailor shops. You can grow wheat and a baker can turn it into bread. Apiaries, taverns, etc. It's all these little details that, for me, separates Settlers 6 from most RTS or strategy games. It's a little bit Medieval simulator, with some action and exploration built in.

    You can zoom right in watching your settlers as they work, and they will speak to you and give feedback as to their level of comfort. This is not one of those abstract empire building games where the UI is basically a board game played on your PC, against a computer AI. Settlers 6 is real time, and you can see your settlers up close, as well as interact with them. The maps and models are fully rendered, which allows you to not only zoom in, but also rotate the camera or your building models in any direction. People compare this game to Age of Empires, but graphically Settlers 6 looks like a modern game, whereas AoE III looks like a DOS game (with all due respect). Being that Settlers 6 is also less combat oriented, your units are only limited to 2 types, archers and swordsman, but, you also have your knight, who is on horseback, and you can build 4 types of siege engines.

    Another couple of points I want to get out there. I've read some say that this specific installment is less complex than it's predecessors. I straight up disagree. After completing Settlers 6 I went on to try earlier versions and actually found them lacking in comparison. I think sometimes people confuse a less informative and cryptic UI as complexity. I've also played Settler 7 and I still feel Settlers 6 is the winner. Admittedly, missions can get repetitive, but the trick for me was to just take my time on each map, and build up my town and gain he highest rank possible with my knight before rushing to the objective.

    Another happy note. The custom map missions come with a sandbox style map called "free settlement". A great way to enjoy the game once you've completed the campaign.    … Expand
  9. MKerogazov
    Oct 8, 2019
    5
    There is no way but to compare as there are games of the same genre on the market and I was comparing it with the game of Anno series... Hands down, Anno is much better. The mechanics for development are not easy to follow, so you don't exactly know how many of each building you need to keep your town in balance; controls are fine, but I had to use a keyboard for moving around; the storyThere is no way but to compare as there are games of the same genre on the market and I was comparing it with the game of Anno series... Hands down, Anno is much better. The mechanics for development are not easy to follow, so you don't exactly know how many of each building you need to keep your town in balance; controls are fine, but I had to use a keyboard for moving around; the story is sort of meh. I haven't played Settlers series much before (tried one of the first very long time ago and didn't like it much) and wasn't much impressed this time. It's not bad, but not good enough for me to spend my time on it.… Expand
  10. FredPL
    Jul 13, 2014
    8
    Really nice game with nice graphics, quite simple mechanics compared to Stronghold 2. Its not to hard core or sth. Campaign is nice to play, its long enough to sit and play for about 30 hours.

Awards & Rankings

98
#98 Most Discussed PC Game of 2007
82
#82 Most Shared PC Game of 2007

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
66

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 19
  2. Mixed: 15 out of 19
  3. Negative: 0 out of 19
  1. PC Format
    62
    It's the same old game with prettier graphics and a half-decent story. Settlers-heads will love it, but best wait for it to appear on budget. [Nov 2007, p.52]
  2. IGN
    65
    Despite being the best game in the series because of some lovely visuals and good gameplay enhancements, The Settlers: Rise of an Empire still manages to screw enough things up to be aggravating.
    Read full review
  3. GameSpy
    50
    Unfortunately, the creators of Rise of an Empire have managed to make a Settlers game so narrow in scope and so lacking in player control that it's only slightly more interactive than dropping fish flakes in with the Neon Tetras.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »