Universe at War: Earth Assault

 PC
User Score
8.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 149 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 114 out of 149
  2. Mixed: 24 out of 149
  3. Negative: 11 out of 149
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. MechMarine
    Jun 8, 2011
    6
    While Universe at War could have been a glorious game, comparable to Starcraft in how different the factions are, there are some issues that make it considerably less than it could have been. First of all the most glaring example, units are too strong. Every fight lasts minutes because units have so much health and so little damage. Superweapons are a mere support power, in fact the onlyWhile Universe at War could have been a glorious game, comparable to Starcraft in how different the factions are, there are some issues that make it considerably less than it could have been. First of all the most glaring example, units are too strong. Every fight lasts minutes because units have so much health and so little damage. Superweapons are a mere support power, in fact the only super weapon that is powerful is the Novus Gravity Bomb, a black-hole type power that sucks all units into it. Oh, and it deals more damage than almost anything else. Another issue is the fact that two of the three factions are considerably more useful than the third. The 1st faction, Hierarchy, who is based around steamrolling, yet have the best scout (Monolith) and the have the ability to see the entire map at once. They are also the only faction to have an artillery unit, who is also debatable the most powerful Hero unit in the game. They also have structures who double as what is essentially an Epic/Super unit. The 2nd faction, Novus, is a swarming faction who also has the only notable Air units. The Dervish is a fast fighter that also has the ability to shoot lightning in every direction and kill just about anything. They are also supported by Vertigo, the only Air Hero. Vertigo is stealthed, fast, and has a deadly Railgun. The Novus also have Mirabel, who has more offensive capability than any other Novus unit. She has a powerful burst-fire Railgun, shoulder launched anti-ground missiles, and the ability to snipe a target from long distances. This Sniper ability is the only weapon that can instant kill another unit besides Superpowers. The final faction, the Masari, are supposedly Gods, yet are horribly outmatched. They supposedly are the turtling faction, yet the Novus have the only turret that can hit air and ground. The Novus turret also redirects enemy fire and increases in damage as more of them are made. The Hierarchy has an anti-ground turret that can mutate infantry into zombies and hold most vehicles at bay. The Hierarchy Anti-air turret can pull air units to the ground while it kills them when upgraded. The Air units cannot escape. Even Vertigo is not immune. The Hierarchy also has a stealth hero who can pull air units down, and then turn invincible as he drains their health. He can also drain vehicles health while invincible. His claws deal with infantry easily. Generally, this makes him a deadly force against all units. His one weakness: He has pathetic range. The game does have many more differences in the factions than games like Supreme Commander 2, but it is nowhere close to the differences between Starcraft's factions, and the differences are not exploited as much as in games like Command and Conquer 3.… Expand
  2. CraneC
    Sep 27, 2009
    6
    UAW is a fun game for the first few matches. You have three races, but no real reason for havng all three of them. The game has lots of research and heroes and odd things, but they are completely unnecessary to win. I as playing a friend from South America over the internet (surprisingly little lag) and I easily beat him 3 times in a row without researching anything, building any heroes, UAW is a fun game for the first few matches. You have three races, but no real reason for havng all three of them. The game has lots of research and heroes and odd things, but they are completely unnecessary to win. I as playing a friend from South America over the internet (surprisingly little lag) and I easily beat him 3 times in a row without researching anything, building any heroes, or anything of the sort. The battles can take forever, as if your CP is getting destroyed, all you hav to do is send a single builder person to build another CP somewhere else. The CPs barely cost any resources and build quickly, so you could build them all across the battlefield in random placs and your opponent would have trouble finding you. The game is extremely buggy and crashes all of the time. And windows live is the biggest pain in the ass ever.… Expand
  3. ZachR.
    Apr 14, 2008
    5
    I have to say I'm pretty disappointed with this game right from the start. Visually it is very disappointing, especially considering the $50 price tag. The graphics look like something from 5-10 years ago. It's a poor man's C&C.
  4. DavidG.
    Feb 11, 2008
    6
    Even if the game has good graphical features and a smooth gameplay, I don't enjoy playing it. The story and characters lack of creativity, the fighting is just horrible and the voices are terrible. It's not the worst out there, neither the best So I give it a 6.
  5. ChrisK.
    Jan 20, 2008
    7
    It was a fairly good game -- though I ran into a few glitches that necessitated restarting levels (or the game). The third campaign felt like a complete cop-out, and level loading took absurdly long (and the game hiccuped even as levels started up). As reviews said, it is not a bad RTS by any means. However, it was very unsatisfying, and didn't leave me anywhere near as entertained It was a fairly good game -- though I ran into a few glitches that necessitated restarting levels (or the game). The third campaign felt like a complete cop-out, and level loading took absurdly long (and the game hiccuped even as levels started up). As reviews said, it is not a bad RTS by any means. However, it was very unsatisfying, and didn't leave me anywhere near as entertained as C&C3 or WC3.… Expand
  6. [Anonymous]
    Jan 15, 2008
    5
    Has innovative ideas, but poor controls and buggy unit performance (fail to select targets if not directly ordered, etc) game feels incomplete. Don't ship until it's done for MY convenience!
  7. JWC.
    Jan 3, 2008
    6
    Many annoyances with the UI and menu system. No easy way to pause the game that I could find. No way to change the game speed that I could find. The menu system is sluggish and buggy. The game loads slowly, there's a solid 10s delay before the game shows that it's launching (by showing all the little logo cutscenes, Sega, NVidia etc). The units and story are interesting but the Many annoyances with the UI and menu system. No easy way to pause the game that I could find. No way to change the game speed that I could find. The menu system is sluggish and buggy. The game loads slowly, there's a solid 10s delay before the game shows that it's launching (by showing all the little logo cutscenes, Sega, NVidia etc). The units and story are interesting but the gameplay isn't all that fun. Superior to most RTSs out there but inferior to something like C&C Generals.… Expand
  8. Shawn
    Dec 30, 2007
    6
    I played many RTS Starcraft,warcraft,total annihilationfrom cave dog. ex. Universe at war showed potential in a slightly diffrent RTS style game. Single player campian was thumbs down when it came to strategy becouse it showed no real involvment in using diffrent units. Use the largest unit built it many times and crush your foes. This is the basic mindset this game has shown me. As for I played many RTS Starcraft,warcraft,total annihilationfrom cave dog. ex. Universe at war showed potential in a slightly diffrent RTS style game. Single player campian was thumbs down when it came to strategy becouse it showed no real involvment in using diffrent units. Use the largest unit built it many times and crush your foes. This is the basic mindset this game has shown me. As for grafic's this game has done well in a few things but it can be comonly found to be similar to command and conquer and being a supreme commander vet I was unimpressed by how it tried to make it look like there was alot happening but only end up showing a single super unit marching along to your base as you throw as many smaller units as posible to stop it. I give this game a 6 for a decent effort in a new line of RTS games.… Expand
  9. Splug
    Dec 13, 2007
    6
    Honestly, I was really looking forward to this game. Usually, RTS games can keep me engaged from the get go. The style, the graphics, it all seemed like it could be awesome.

    However, after 25 minutes of playing it, I've almost completely lost interest in it. I plan on playing it through (50 bucks is still 50 bucks), I just plan on playing it for uh 15-20 minutes at a time, maybe a    Honestly, I was really looking forward to this game. Usually, RTS games can keep me engaged from the get go. The style, the graphics, it all seemed like it could be awesome.

    However, after 25 minutes of playing it, I've almost completely lost interest in it. I plan on playing it through (50 bucks is still 50 bucks), I just plan on playing it for uh 15-20 minutes at a time, maybe a couple times a week....    … Expand
  10. Mr.Orange
    Dec 4, 2007
    6
    Pretty much the same crap we've been playing since C&C in 1995. Brings absolutely nothing new the to the RTS genre.
  11. Meestyk
    Nov 19, 2007
    7
    As is I get the impression it will be more fustration than enjoyment from this game. Tried the demo and I must say nice graphics, interface, and a good story, but it has its flaws and it shows. For one, you'll notice right away with the units mechanics; they tend to get stuck trying to move out of the way to get to where they are ordered to go by you, much fustration and waste ofAs is I get the impression it will be more fustration than enjoyment from this game. Tried the demo and I must say nice graphics, interface, and a good story, but it has its flaws and it shows. For one, you'll notice right away with the units mechanics; they tend to get stuck trying to move out of the way to get to where they are ordered to go by you, much fustration and waste of time. Number two, you'll notice some of the lines used in voice acting, it sounds like a retarded kid wrote those lines from a comic gone bad. My prediction is a rushed game to make a return without any considerations for the gamers demands. My advice is to wait until the game makers give you a good patch to fix its many flaws. Some similar games out there are more enjoyable than this guy at the moment. Some of you may like it due to the fact you've perhaps never played such game, but for the hardcore gamers like me, save for better future games that meet or surpass your expectations.… Expand

Awards & Rankings

55
#55 Best PC Game of 2007
27
#27 Most Discussed PC Game of 2007

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 48 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 33 out of 48
  2. Mixed: 15 out of 48
  3. Negative: 0 out of 48
  1. Hardcore Gamer
    80
    Universe at War is a good title, but it isn't without it's flaws. As-is, though, Universe at War is a comfortable ride. [Dec 2007, p.64]
  2. 1UP
    70
    Sophistication's not UAW's strong suit: It flaunts its influences on its sleeve and thrives on its absurd outlandishness -- an exploitation RTS, suitable for midnight screenings.
    Read full review
  3. Play Magazine
    75
    RTS fans would do well to investigate Universe at War. [Dec 2007, p.96]
See all critic reviews »