User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 425 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 42 out of 425

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
  1. Mar 5, 2014
    6
    This is a good strategy game, but I have some problems with it: The online deathmatch is full of experts with level 100 and above, who are not kind to "noobs" (they judge you by the level you received (with one civilization of course)). The games can last a long time and after awhile it gets a bit booring.
    Nevertheless is Age of Empires III a good game to play with your friends and the
    This is a good strategy game, but I have some problems with it: The online deathmatch is full of experts with level 100 and above, who are not kind to "noobs" (they judge you by the level you received (with one civilization of course)). The games can last a long time and after awhile it gets a bit booring.
    Nevertheless is Age of Empires III a good game to play with your friends and the campaign is also good.
    Expand
  2. Oct 23, 2013
    8
    Even though it feels familiar, it is a good sequel. Disappointingly, it doesn't revolutionize nothing, but it's a visual flare and a fun strategy game. It's a nice conclusion to an amazing trilogy.
    It follow relatively the same gameplay as it's predecessor, adding an interesting Home City system. With an awesome timeline, it kept me enjoyed with it's smoothness on overall making strategy
    Even though it feels familiar, it is a good sequel. Disappointingly, it doesn't revolutionize nothing, but it's a visual flare and a fun strategy game. It's a nice conclusion to an amazing trilogy.
    It follow relatively the same gameplay as it's predecessor, adding an interesting Home City system. With an awesome timeline, it kept me enjoyed with it's smoothness on overall making strategy and beautiful, just gorgeous visuals. It has you choosing the city and country you want to choose, making strategy and gathering resources with citizen and exploration. The flaw here is that it is rather too familiar to be anything revolutionary.
    However, the old AOE gameplay is fantastic and the visuals will blow you away. It's another great game of the series and it's remarkable. (Final Score: 8.77)
    Expand
  3. Mar 3, 2014
    5
    As an AoE II fan I loved how this game was graphically a huge step forward for the series. The game truly comes to life like it never did before. However, I have played this game only about 20 hours. Sometimes I ran the game again but everytime I quit before I even started a game. As soon as the thrill of playing what looks like a new prettier version of a good game wore off, it became aAs an AoE II fan I loved how this game was graphically a huge step forward for the series. The game truly comes to life like it never did before. However, I have played this game only about 20 hours. Sometimes I ran the game again but everytime I quit before I even started a game. As soon as the thrill of playing what looks like a new prettier version of a good game wore off, it became a huge disappointment.
    The campaign is now mostly a fantasy story, while one of the reasons I enjoyed Age of Kings so much was because the scenarios were (based on) actual historical events. Also, there are only 3 storylines in the original game, where AoK had 5 (including 1 tutorial).
    Another great disappointment was the map creator. In Age of Kings this feature alone added a few hundred hours of gameplay to my total. AoE III threw overboard the simple interface in the map creator. As a result, the map creating is so incomprehensible it is virtually impossible to create a map (let alone a scenario) without googling how to do basic things every other minute. And even after searching the web for answers, when I tried to change the map size to bigger than the initial tiny, I got an error message. Because the campaign wasn't that great either, this serious flaw pretty much destroyed any replay value this game had left.
    I was unimpressed by the (lack of) variety and nations as well. Age of Kings and the Conquerors together offered 18 civilisations to play with, whili AoE III and its two expansions together gave 14. True, some strategic elements are improved. Nations have more unique units and technologies, and the naval part is improved a lot. However, I never really played any AoE game for the strategic experience, I play it for fun. And as I find naval warfare not nearly as interesting as knights, soldiers and suicide bombers, those improvements really didn't do it for me. The same goes for the time. AoE III is set in the early modern period in the Americas, just after they're discovered. I was kind of bummed when I found out, because I love medieval strategy with castles and knights and kings. But the game captures the atmosphere nicely.
    Age of Empires III also added a kind of trading card game as a new gameplay element. I do have mixed feelings about that. It really adds a new layer of strategy to the game, and it's quite fun leveling up and upgrading your cards. But I think this doesn't really belong in an AoE game. Because as I said before, I don't play Age of Empires because I want in-depth strategy, I play it because I want to play an easily accessible game with countless different options for different games and just as much options for messing around.
    Expand
  4. JonM
    Oct 26, 2009
    8
    I thought this game was a great improvement from AOE2 because of the superior graphics (To AOE2). I am a little annoyed at the card system it made (That's why its an 8 of 10). Instead of all countries BASICALLY having the same units, there is a main spread. Each country has its own strength and are equally powerful if you use them the right way (AOE2 the pawning factions were was I thought this game was a great improvement from AOE2 because of the superior graphics (To AOE2). I am a little annoyed at the card system it made (That's why its an 8 of 10). Instead of all countries BASICALLY having the same units, there is a main spread. Each country has its own strength and are equally powerful if you use them the right way (AOE2 the pawning factions were was just Vikings, Tuetonics, Mongols, and Huns). The AI did not improve, that's not so bad because the AI is smart. Should be recognized as AOE's series "last game" (That I know of, besides War Chiefs). Expand
  5. Yablo
    Jan 9, 2006
    10
    I love thise game... no more wasting time on making buildings to get resources in faster. The cards add great new demension to the strategy of the game. The only thing that needs to be worked on is the hit points of buildings.. they go down a bit fast.
  6. MikeH.
    Oct 15, 2005
    7
    AoE 2 > AoE 3. The graphics are nice (not that special). The water looks nice. The economy sucks. You make villagers and they just gather resources, you don't even have to build a gather site. Later on you can make buildings that automaticly generate resources, making everything focused on fighting. The fighting is boring and stupid. Cannons are overpowered/cause lag because of AoE 2 > AoE 3. The graphics are nice (not that special). The water looks nice. The economy sucks. You make villagers and they just gather resources, you don't even have to build a gather site. Later on you can make buildings that automaticly generate resources, making everything focused on fighting. The fighting is boring and stupid. Cannons are overpowered/cause lag because of needless physics that can't be turned off. The campaign is stupid. This is age of empires not age of magic. I wanna play a campaign about history not fiction. Fountain of youth? WTF? Russians in the US? WTF? Someone was smokin hella good weed when they made this. Online is fun. ESO is ok but not as good as Battlenet. You get a homecity its like an RPG because you need to lvl it up. Yeah not much to say 7/10 is a nice score for this game I want to give it lower cause it pisses me off but yeah I won't be like that. Peace out go play Age of Empires 2. Expand
  7. MarkS
    Dec 12, 2006
    7
    First of all, the Fountain of Youth, at least the QUEST for the fountain is not myth.. a lot of men and explorers died in the hunt for it.. Anyway... the game it's self is not a jump forward, except for in the graphics/physics department. The lack of a gathering point is annoying, and the upgrades are rather weak. It's a good fun game if you wanna kill time, but if you are aFirst of all, the Fountain of Youth, at least the QUEST for the fountain is not myth.. a lot of men and explorers died in the hunt for it.. Anyway... the game it's self is not a jump forward, except for in the graphics/physics department. The lack of a gathering point is annoying, and the upgrades are rather weak. It's a good fun game if you wanna kill time, but if you are a HARDCORE AOE fan, you will not like it. Expand
  8. NoahT.
    Mar 20, 2006
    10
    I liked the diversity of the units and buildings including native americans. I cant wait for the expansion pack to come out.
  9. Nov 23, 2012
    10
    This is, in a few words, the best RTS among ''classical rts''. A game with an interesting, but not complex economy; a base to build and defend, your homecity to level up...Then i have to say i love mechanics like rock-paper-scissor in battles (i.e. cannons>pikes>horses>archers ...), and DECKS to build are a good way to break monotony even with the same ''nation'' used over and over.
    With
    This is, in a few words, the best RTS among ''classical rts''. A game with an interesting, but not complex economy; a base to build and defend, your homecity to level up...Then i have to say i love mechanics like rock-paper-scissor in battles (i.e. cannons>pikes>horses>archers ...), and DECKS to build are a good way to break monotony even with the same ''nation'' used over and over.
    With AoE3 i started playing online in a more ''serious'' way, if is it possible to say that ;)
    Expand
  10. Dec 22, 2011
    5
    Really not all to great. Not deserving of the title AOE:III. Age of Empires ii and even i were much much better. Online play wouldn't even work for me. Don't waste your money on this- get age of mythology if you want a 3d aoe type game.
  11. Mar 7, 2013
    9
    The realistic graphics is the first thing a player notice in the game. But as the game goes on, you find yourself trapped in the huge number of different tasks your must complete in order to grow your village, collect as many resources as you can and build a considerable defense so you don't get caught off guard, and eventually attack. This is the definition of RTS and this game has theThe realistic graphics is the first thing a player notice in the game. But as the game goes on, you find yourself trapped in the huge number of different tasks your must complete in order to grow your village, collect as many resources as you can and build a considerable defense so you don't get caught off guard, and eventually attack. This is the definition of RTS and this game has the best of it. You don't get bored, because you don't stop commanding your citizens for a second, and you don't get tired of doing the same thing over and over. Different nations allow different tactics, units, buildings keeps you playing and the language npc's speak can be fun. Also the campaign is very interesting, although it's not the best I've seen. Expand
  12. Jan 13, 2013
    9
    Really Enjoyed the second game in this series, and I love this game even more, the campaign left more to be desired, and was too short in my opinion, in comparison to the other games in the series, but new features such as a home city add a new layer of strategy to the game which makes it a lot more enjoyable and easier to get involved with.
  13. Mar 25, 2013
    9
    This was the game I grew up with. I had lots of fun playing this for hours and hours. Great game, Great campaign, almost great everything. The multiplayer was very fun, but I would often find lot of issues with the connection and the horrible lag. I also later discovered that when I played Age of Empires 2, it had a much better feel then Age of Empires 3. I felt something was stripped offThis was the game I grew up with. I had lots of fun playing this for hours and hours. Great game, Great campaign, almost great everything. The multiplayer was very fun, but I would often find lot of issues with the connection and the horrible lag. I also later discovered that when I played Age of Empires 2, it had a much better feel then Age of Empires 3. I felt something was stripped off of Age of Empires 3, that should of not been stripped off. Overall great game and I wish more people would play the Age of Empires franchise. Expand
  14. MorganC.
    Jan 3, 2006
    9
    A solid game. A little repetitive, but well worth your money.
  15. DanC.
    May 8, 2007
    9
    Yes, it's not much of an update for the older ones, but it's classic AOE just with way cool graphics and physics. The storyline is excellent and very challenging on hard level. Multiplayer is good, me and my bro can play over our WI-FI network and the online function is awesome. Only problems are no multiplayer save and the scenario generator is hard to use.
  16. FredB.
    Jul 7, 2007
    5
    This game does not live up to its predecessors. The gameplay is much too simple. While Age of Kings and Age of Mythology contained many unique units, AoE3 basically has only a few different kinds of units with some variation in fundamental stats and graphics. This is the game's main problem. The game makes up for this by focusing on special traits for each civilization, but this is This game does not live up to its predecessors. The gameplay is much too simple. While Age of Kings and Age of Mythology contained many unique units, AoE3 basically has only a few different kinds of units with some variation in fundamental stats and graphics. This is the game's main problem. The game makes up for this by focusing on special traits for each civilization, but this is not enough. The home city system is a good concept, but it also gives the player too much of an advantage over computer opponents, which do not appear to use them. Trade routes are a good feature of the game. They add strategy by setting fixed locations to try to control. Native Americans are another good feature, though the lack of unique units makes for squandered potential in this area. The campaign was also unsatisfactory. The scenarios were too short and most of them were just the same build-and-destroy scenario on a different map. It quickly becomes repetitive and boring. Finally, unless you have the best graphics card ever, don't play maps with a lot of water. The game tends to slow down severely whenever a ship or dock is taking damage. Expand
  17. Hilly
    Nov 2, 2005
    5
    Nice looking but very flawed. AOE2 was fantastic with combat because it emphasized formations. In the early gunpowder age, everything was formation-based -- think British squares and lines at Waterloo. Instead of emphasizing and expanding on what AOE2 had, there seems to be a step backwards to make it more akin to AOMythology. AOM was an enjoyable game, but it's not an AOE game. Nice looking but very flawed. AOE2 was fantastic with combat because it emphasized formations. In the early gunpowder age, everything was formation-based -- think British squares and lines at Waterloo. Instead of emphasizing and expanding on what AOE2 had, there seems to be a step backwards to make it more akin to AOMythology. AOM was an enjoyable game, but it's not an AOE game. Here, formations can't easily follow other formations, there's no wheeling about, no way to make a New Model Army, little co-ordination, no good way to keep support units like healers out of battle by, no obvious way to select a default stance, and even trying to keep units in a line when told to "stand ground" feels like cat herding. If there IS a way to do these things, it's not obvious or clear at all . Games like Rise of Nations and Rome: Total War do a much better job of dealing with combat, especially RON. Given all that, I very much like the Home City concept. It adds another level of strategic planning and unpredictability. Overall, a good buy, but not a must-have. Expand
  18. Andrew
    Nov 3, 2005
    7
    AOE 3 is a nice game, but it is not a great game like AOE 2/ Nice Campaign, but it was too similar to AOMythology. There was a sense of been there, done that through the whole campaign. Its not bad and if u like the RTS genre, try it out.
  19. Kurei
    Nov 8, 2005
    6
    Being a big fan of AOEII, I was naturally looking forward to this game, but it turned out to be a rather insipid followup to an otherwise fantastic series. The included campaign is contrived and is based on some ridiculous mythical premise which was obviously very poorly thought out. It doesnt help that the heroes look and behave like punks you wanna beat up on. IMO the interface takes up Being a big fan of AOEII, I was naturally looking forward to this game, but it turned out to be a rather insipid followup to an otherwise fantastic series. The included campaign is contrived and is based on some ridiculous mythical premise which was obviously very poorly thought out. It doesnt help that the heroes look and behave like punks you wanna beat up on. IMO the interface takes up too much screen real estate. The graphics are ok, but they are nothing fantastic for a contemporary game. Controlling the artillery is a major pain in the butt - you usually end up with arty pieces wheeling around in the heat of battle. Even the computer controlled units do it so its a design flaw(?) Otherwise it is an OK and well built game. OK buy but nothing special, and well short of the hype. Expand
  20. RobertN.
    Oct 24, 2005
    8
    Although this game does not reach the height of the great AoE2 it is still a good example of a well made, fairly solid RTS. The game play is redesigned so that you can receive home city shipment which makes the game a little more fast paced than AoE2 and gives you plenty room to expand with tons of technologies and the ability for your Home City to gain levels. All Civilizations are very Although this game does not reach the height of the great AoE2 it is still a good example of a well made, fairly solid RTS. The game play is redesigned so that you can receive home city shipment which makes the game a little more fast paced than AoE2 and gives you plenty room to expand with tons of technologies and the ability for your Home City to gain levels. All Civilizations are very unique giving the player many playing style options. In spite of what many have said, the economical part of the gameplay has not lost its importance at all! The concept is exactly the same: the more settlers you have working on a resource the more of that resource you will collect. You also have many technologies that allow you to gain resources faster. You can NOT expect any RTS to exhibit real life scenarios perfectly at the expense of Gameplay. Even in AoE2, when a villager would build a house, they did not need to stop by the lumber mill to pick up wood. That would be annoying. I would just be supplied automatically. In a sense, AoE3 just eliminates another Expand
  21. DarrenD.
    Oct 24, 2005
    9
    A solidly entertaining game with nicely focused and satisfying gameplay. Ensemble Studios continues to polish the Age of Empires series to perfection, and this latest title is no exception.
  22. SergeyS.
    Dec 20, 2006
    9
    Surprisingly addictive. Got this game free with my new PC and not expecting much from a free add-on I decided to give it a shot and ended up playing 5 hours straight. What really draws you in is the storyline, not the best I've seen, but gets you going.
  23. MarkR.
    Apr 24, 2006
    10
    A real step forward for the series in my opinion. I have come to appreciate the many strategies and depth this game offers which I was too young to appreciate in the previous games (making this feel like the best one). The Graphics and Sound are immersive and although there are some balance problems it is probably my favourite game of all time just ahead of Counter-Strike. Although not A real step forward for the series in my opinion. I have come to appreciate the many strategies and depth this game offers which I was too young to appreciate in the previous games (making this feel like the best one). The Graphics and Sound are immersive and although there are some balance problems it is probably my favourite game of all time just ahead of Counter-Strike. Although not tired of this I eagerly anticipate the expansion pack. Expand
  24. Tom
    Sep 20, 2007
    8
    A great follow up to the other AOEs but definitly not as good as the 2nd AOE.
  25. JohnS.
    Nov 1, 2005
    3
    Clint R. is right. This is a major step backward from the solid gameplay of AoE2. It tries to take some revolutionary steps forward, but overall uninteresting gameplay really just makes it lame. It's like it's trying to be an RTS version of one of those German boardgames (like Settlers of Cattan) but not achieving a fun sense of gameplay or a good taste of strategy. I would have Clint R. is right. This is a major step backward from the solid gameplay of AoE2. It tries to take some revolutionary steps forward, but overall uninteresting gameplay really just makes it lame. It's like it's trying to be an RTS version of one of those German boardgames (like Settlers of Cattan) but not achieving a fun sense of gameplay or a good taste of strategy. I would have much preferred a big ol' expansion pack for AoE2 with all new races. Couldn't stomach the game play long enough to make it though the built-in story, so I have no idea if it's any good. Expand
  26. Christian
    Oct 19, 2005
    9
    I don't see why people are so hard on this game, try the demo first if you're skeptical. It's great: super fun, great graphics, and amazing physics. It may not be genre-bending, but it's not meant to be. It's good at what it aimed to be good at.
  27. Mobius
    Oct 19, 2005
    8
    Graphics are an improvement and if you liked age 1&2 then you will see they have kept the exact same gamepay in age 3. At first glance the game looks the same as age of mythology and sounds the same also. but overall its a good game and you should many hours of fun out of it.
  28. ThomasH.
    Dec 31, 2005
    5
    The Biggest dissapointment in a long time, looks great from the trailors, but really is just AOE 1 with new menus and graphics. Buy Soldiers Heroes of World War II/ Faces of War, cheaper and better.
  29. LPG.
    Sep 6, 2006
    10
    it rocks. The graphics are smooth and realistic and the RTS part is brillant. A must for all age players!
  30. brian
    Oct 28, 2007
    8
    for the regular gamer that well likes a good game aoe 3 is cool. i think "dan b" is too harsh. its an improvement on the previous aoe games, easier to play and more fun - thats what a game is supposed to be. if u dont like it then make a better one yourself!
  31. RTSgamer
    Nov 13, 2008
    9
    LAN playing is greatly enhanced in AOE3. Faster paced game; less focus on resource gathering, and more on battles. I have played AOE and AOE2, and ignoring the graphics, I dislike how slow troops train. It takes forever just to make an army. AOE3 offers much better graphics, and anyone who has decent hardware and actually gets into the game will have a blast. The rock, paper, scissors LAN playing is greatly enhanced in AOE3. Faster paced game; less focus on resource gathering, and more on battles. I have played AOE and AOE2, and ignoring the graphics, I dislike how slow troops train. It takes forever just to make an army. AOE3 offers much better graphics, and anyone who has decent hardware and actually gets into the game will have a blast. The rock, paper, scissors element is much more emphasized, and to beat your opponent you must utilize that. Expand
  32. ConnorM.
    Jan 27, 2010
    10
    People that are making bad comments about this game are probably noobs because they keep getting owned, even if they're still in Age 1. So that explains why there aren't many people online. I also love the fact that you can also use CPUs online, and building limits is a smart idea, even on units. my message to you haters, get some skills and you'll change your mind on this People that are making bad comments about this game are probably noobs because they keep getting owned, even if they're still in Age 1. So that explains why there aren't many people online. I also love the fact that you can also use CPUs online, and building limits is a smart idea, even on units. my message to you haters, get some skills and you'll change your mind on this game. I don't care if you become hypocrites, I'm fine with it. Expand
  33. JoeyS.
    Nov 30, 2005
    9
    Really enjoyed the game. The graphics were great. A few MINOR flaws, but still a great game. Recommended.
  34. Padagortrax
    Nov 6, 2005
    7
    This is not a bad game -in fact RTS is my favourite genre- but imho this game delivers nothing new. Yes, the graphics are good, but I didn't find any great challenges or innovative leaps forward. I was a bit disappointed as I had been eagerly awaiting its release. Good, but not brilliant!
  35. LokiF.
    Oct 22, 2005
    5
    Ok, but not very different to other RTS, such as Rise of Nations, Empire Earth II.
  36. KevinS.
    Oct 23, 2005
    4
    The server issues are horrible! I hate RTS as single player games, and I've been trying since it was released to play online and found that their servers are down more than they're up. Frustrating! Why release a game with those kinds of issues... I could've spent my $50 on a game that works! Greedy bums!
  37. SouravM.
    Oct 26, 2005
    10
    This is superb. Much better than previous AOE. Vast attractive and very nice gameplay.
  38. BrianH.
    Oct 26, 2005
    9
    Oh... god I love this game. I got the Collectors edition($70), and it was totally worth it. I got an art book, a poster, the soundtrack, along with a bevy of other AoE3 related goodies (and the game itself, of course) I love the systems of this game... There were a couple of things that bugged me a little (walls only upgrade once, little things like that) but the thing it kept the most, Oh... god I love this game. I got the Collectors edition($70), and it was totally worth it. I got an art book, a poster, the soundtrack, along with a bevy of other AoE3 related goodies (and the game itself, of course) I love the systems of this game... There were a couple of things that bugged me a little (walls only upgrade once, little things like that) but the thing it kept the most, was good old fashioned difficulty level! this game is hard... well wait, let me rephrase that, this game is EASY...on easy, average on normal, and HARD ON HARD!!! GOD ITS DIFFICULT!!! ugh... and I swear if anyone calls me a n00b... >.>. but yeah, i love it. The enemy AI is awesome, they will flank you, pincer you, do all sorts of fun stuff *shiver* they've gotten me with the pincer several times, BUT THATS NOT THE POINT!!!! this game rox... thats my story and Im stickin to it. Expand
  39. ClintR.
    Oct 27, 2005
    5
    Nice graphics of course, but it doesn't begin to hold a candle to AoE2. So if you want it because you're a diehard aoe:tc fan...don't waste your money. It's not nearly as fast paced as its predecessor nor am I engaged as thoroughly regarding the economic aspects of the game. im not a deathmatch lover tho, i greatly enjoy building the econ. hey what can i say? i outboom Nice graphics of course, but it doesn't begin to hold a candle to AoE2. So if you want it because you're a diehard aoe:tc fan...don't waste your money. It's not nearly as fast paced as its predecessor nor am I engaged as thoroughly regarding the economic aspects of the game. im not a deathmatch lover tho, i greatly enjoy building the econ. hey what can i say? i outboom and conquer. this game seems more weighted for the combat. the whole homecity shipment thing bothers me too. feels like the game has digressed from aoe2, but I guess im just a purist. my 2 cents Expand
  40. MichaelL.
    Apr 16, 2006
    7
    The graphics are fantastic and the addition of physics to an RTS is very welcome. However, I, like many reviewers, have played this game before. The card system is a rehash of the God powers of AoM. The Home City is very insignificant and is only meant to increase the longevity of the game until you see how shallow it really is. AOE III has many strengths, like its style, graphics, and The graphics are fantastic and the addition of physics to an RTS is very welcome. However, I, like many reviewers, have played this game before. The card system is a rehash of the God powers of AoM. The Home City is very insignificant and is only meant to increase the longevity of the game until you see how shallow it really is. AOE III has many strengths, like its style, graphics, and polish, but it is nothing new. If this sounds like the reviewers above, it's because I feel the same way - a bit unsatisfied. I still had fun with it, though. Ensemble is amazing. Expand
  41. TransC.
    Jun 17, 2006
    10
    A great game. If you take the most favorable review, and improve everything in it half over again, that's how I feel about AoE3. The one problem is a few bugs, but they can be easily fixed by patches.
  42. LarryThompson
    Sep 29, 2006
    10
    This game is really cool and i think it would be nice is they made age of empire 4:The cold war or word war two and Wold war one. Im 15 year's old and i say it's awsome! [some day i wish i can help you guy's desine one of my idea's or your's! But i dont have the game yet but i will get it soon. Please reture a response and what you think! Thank you!
  43. RandallS.
    Oct 27, 2007
    7
    The campaign definitely isn't anything to write home about, it gets boring really quickly. The multiplayer is good for kicks, but it has some serious flaws. I'd recommend Age of Mythology for a good RTS. I went back to it after a couple weeks of AoE3. The units are fun and unique, you don't need to deal with cities which end up to be just an annoyance, and it actually The campaign definitely isn't anything to write home about, it gets boring really quickly. The multiplayer is good for kicks, but it has some serious flaws. I'd recommend Age of Mythology for a good RTS. I went back to it after a couple weeks of AoE3. The units are fun and unique, you don't need to deal with cities which end up to be just an annoyance, and it actually matters who you pick when you advance through the ages. Definitely a top notch RTS. AoE3 was somewhat of a disappointment, but it is a good game. Expand
  44. Hallowfax
    Nov 18, 2007
    5
    I expected the campaign to be better than it's predecessors, I wanted not only it's graphics good, but a wide variety of gameplay options. My overall review is varied, I just have to give it an in-between rating.
  45. Jan 23, 2011
    9
    It's a shame that Microsoft disbanded Ensemble Studios, they created a great game. The graphics are amazing, especially being a 6 year old game. The single-player campaign was decent, it was somewhat interesting but their were some awkward cut-scenes. What makes this game so addicting is its multiplayer. Yes, the game is slowly dying, like all old games do, but their are fan patches andIt's a shame that Microsoft disbanded Ensemble Studios, they created a great game. The graphics are amazing, especially being a 6 year old game. The single-player campaign was decent, it was somewhat interesting but their were some awkward cut-scenes. What makes this game so addicting is its multiplayer. Yes, the game is slowly dying, like all old games do, but their are fan patches and many other options. You shouldn't have a problem finding a game online. Overall, well worth your money. Expand
  46. Jun 6, 2011
    8
    Awesome! I havent played aoe 2, and when i find it i will : ), but this is one of my favorite games. while living with several annoying people i managed to play this game so much, that i overheated my computer and crashed my hard drive. i bought a new one, and appearently my computer isnt compatable anymore.. anyways i loved it so much i gave it to a friend for his b-day(and $20)... backAwesome! I havent played aoe 2, and when i find it i will : ), but this is one of my favorite games. while living with several annoying people i managed to play this game so much, that i overheated my computer and crashed my hard drive. i bought a new one, and appearently my computer isnt compatable anymore.. anyways i loved it so much i gave it to a friend for his b-day(and $20)... back to the game, the single player is the biggest cob job i have ever seen, but the multiplayer is very addicting. this is almost like suited up stronghold 2 with other players. there are several strategies to win and overall, i would reccomend this to anyone who has the time to play a 2 hour long game of eco-based warfare. Expand
  47. Apr 6, 2013
    5
    I could not stand this game. Age of Empires 2 was amazing and Deserves a 10/10, but AOE 3 was just boring. First of all, I do not find the time period interesting at all... Civ Colonization is a much better representation of this. Idk I want to like this game because it's "Age of Empires", but I just didn't like it.
  48. Nov 27, 2011
    9
    This game is awesome. It has nice graphics. It's great for LAN games. And it has excellent game play. I couldn't ask for more in an rts. And the home city system is awesome. It makes each game feel like you're building a colony.
  49. Apr 4, 2012
    7
    A good, not great, RTS game. The single player is pretty bad and not too complex, but playing with or against friends is a lot of fun. Well worth the price if you know people to play it with.
  50. May 16, 2012
    8
    It is a little disappointed, but still it delivers fun, and It is great. It is good looking, and haves some great units. The graphics are really good, and the new Home City system is a blast! But it isn't good as the sequel of the original game, Age of Empires 2. And you really want to know what disappointments it haves? It is with a poor campaign and with a not changed gameplay from theIt is a little disappointed, but still it delivers fun, and It is great. It is good looking, and haves some great units. The graphics are really good, and the new Home City system is a blast! But it isn't good as the sequel of the original game, Age of Empires 2. And you really want to know what disappointments it haves? It is with a poor campaign and with a not changed gameplay from the first. (8.5) Expand
  51. May 24, 2012
    10
    The concept of the game isn't new at all. Sure, the graphics aren't that bad, but the biggest disappointment I felt came from the reduced unit and nation diversities, that can't be satisfied even though you bought the whole expansions pack.
  52. Jan 13, 2013
    8
    A very satisfactory gaming experience. Good plot, awesome characters, exciting gameplay, and a very intricate level editor. The multiplayer is fun and engaging, and the maps are creative. A real winner.
  53. Jan 3, 2013
    5
    I shouldn't complain about graphics in the context of its release date, so i wont. But the looks do detract a little from what's required of you and how the game mechanics actually work. AoE had a square grid system that was easily translated into tactical options by the player, 1 square could have 1 tree or 1 stone block or a building, etc. and said objects would inform the player whereI shouldn't complain about graphics in the context of its release date, so i wont. But the looks do detract a little from what's required of you and how the game mechanics actually work. AoE had a square grid system that was easily translated into tactical options by the player, 1 square could have 1 tree or 1 stone block or a building, etc. and said objects would inform the player where enemies could move/move around or get through them by destroying them. This system is defunct as units can move through trees, although the proximity of trees that will block units appears arbitrary and the way units move through forested areas insinuates a cover mechanic that doesn't exist. This could have been an excellent aspect of the game that was completely forgone. It all leads to one conclusion that the games combat has not evolved. The macro aspect is emphasised by units being built in 5's, it feels so daft you can just multi-select your structures and set a waypoint at the enemy base and be done with it. That's essentially what the game is, 2 bases throwing units blindly at each other.

    This game is all about macro and economy, which is an odd focus for an RTS when requisition mechanics have always been the most boring aspect of strategy games and how macro dilutes any sense of strategy. Micro plays so little in combat that as long as you match up a bunch of varying units your army is safe, or you can be a bastard and just mass cavalry which is good against everything except pikemen; who can be out maneuvered an kited anyway. The deciding factor is often who can amass the largest army or replenish a dying one fastest. A last note on this matter of micro, units have a habit of freezing up when given orders in quick succession as they'll constantly want to change formation. This is the single most annoying thing about this game as it costs significant time and makes your units vulnerable to being sniped as they dawdle in battles.

    The home city mechanic gets in the way of gameplay. That's all about i can say on this innovation, sadly. You're in the middle of a heated skirmish and you're constantly prompted to visit your home town to select a bunch of stuff that contributes almost no significance to the round. This mechanic seems to only exist to keep players playing to grind and level for pointless rewards. A sad turn for a classic genre defining RTS game.

    The battles and skirmishes aren't interesting, the units aren't defined enough, too much focus on macro and subsequent battles of attrition over tactical decision making. Only recommend buying this game in a sale and playing the campaign if you must play it at all. The multiplayer is tiresome and un-interesting. It will disappoint die hard AoE fans.
    Expand
  54. Sep 13, 2013
    8
    First of all, I want to give Ensemble Studios my thanks for creating one of the most iconic and widely-cherished RTS series of all time. Second of all, I want to say I think this game has been pretty harshly treated in the user reviews. The main reason for this overcritical attitude is the large number of gameplay innovations and evolutions introduced by Ensemble in what was one of theirFirst of all, I want to give Ensemble Studios my thanks for creating one of the most iconic and widely-cherished RTS series of all time. Second of all, I want to say I think this game has been pretty harshly treated in the user reviews. The main reason for this overcritical attitude is the large number of gameplay innovations and evolutions introduced by Ensemble in what was one of their last games.
    I think the deviations in formula were a risky move but they definitely helped revitalize the series AoE II is still a solid game, but it epitomizes the style of pre-2000 RTS games. Ensemble needed to make some real changes or it was possible the series would become stale and outdated only its third full release. A couple of of these changes were definitely questionable (I'll mention them throughout the rest of this review) and they stop AoE III from being a 9/10 game but most of them are welcome additions in my eyes.
    Graphically, Age of Empires III is gorgeous. The unit models haven't improved a huge amount from Age of Mythology, but the textures are more vivid and crisp than ever. Damage animations on buildings look great, with realistic-looking explosions and chunks of debris adding to the chaos of battle. Overall the art-style is both rugged and colourful and it looks beautiful across the board I just wish I could zoom out further! Thankfully there is a great mod that lessens the restrictions on zooming but I don't get why Ensemble chose to lock you into such a small field of view.
    The card system is interesting, and both allows for and encourages experimenting with dynamic strategies. There's more differences between factions than ever and the card system adds even more variety in strategies. There are many viable playstyles in AoE III turtling is always an option because of buildings like the plantation, which are an unlimited supply of coin (replacing gold stone has been removed completely which is a bit of a shame) and really great fortifications. Outposts are effective and the wall placement system is just fantastic even more refined than Age of Mythology's.
    At first I wasn't a fan of the circular maps as opposed to the square and rectangular maps Age fans are used to, but after a while it really only bothered me when it came to using the map editor.
    A more sticking criticism is the simplification of the skirmish/random map options. You can have a maximum of two teams that's it. Your only options are playing FFA or a two-team battle, and it's pretty baffling that there aren't more choices.
    All in all AoE comes close to topping AoM as my personal favourite game developed by Ensemble, but it doesn't quite manage it.
    RIP Ensemble Studios and RIP AoE IV and V.
    Expand
  55. Oct 5, 2013
    3
    This game really dissapointed me, even if the graphics were great, they completely changed the Age of Empires style. This looks like another type of game, with very few civilizations, lame campaign and bad mechanics. This is the reason why Microsoft decided to develop Halo Wars and then shut down Esemble Studios.
    A shame that this game sunk the AOE franchise.
  56. Jul 8, 2012
    4
    AOE 3 was a disappointment. It's predecessor was a brilliant, fun strategy game. There were lots of unique civs to pick, historic campaigns to play, and a simple, easy, but flexible map editor. AOE 3 has only a handful of civs, and you have to buy the expansion pack to use any native american civs. There are 3 long campaigns each with 5 minute missions in the place of a ton of shortAOE 3 was a disappointment. It's predecessor was a brilliant, fun strategy game. There were lots of unique civs to pick, historic campaigns to play, and a simple, easy, but flexible map editor. AOE 3 has only a handful of civs, and you have to buy the expansion pack to use any native american civs. There are 3 long campaigns each with 5 minute missions in the place of a ton of short campaigns and a few individual missions. The first campaign was just silly. Magic. No kidding, magic. In the first campaign you have to find the fountain of youth and destroy it to keep a secret organization from using it's powers for evil or something. It sounds like some sort of bad sci fi. Another thing that irritated me when I played was that everything is so... big. The inability to zoom out combined with the fact that every soldier in my army is half an inch tall means that there is very little room on the screen. Not only that, but the maps are very small too. I found myself quickly running out of room to build, and, when I just started and was playing on the easier levels, found myself accidentally destroying an enemy because my guards went rouge. That's another problem. AOE 1 had that command list where you could pick formations, and set units to patrol, guard, escort, or just not attack anything. That's all gone in AOE III. If you want to guard your base with troops, you have to constantly pull them back to keep them from following a trail of retreating enemies back to their home base. In this version, instead of just reducing troop training time, troops train in squads up to 5. Personally, I have no objection to this change though, it saved me one time because I had to train soldiers while under attack, and if they had been coming out 1 by 1 they'd have been slaughtered. And then there's the realism. I'm sorry, but if your unprotected fleeing screaming villager can take over 15 BULLETS TO KILL, there is something seriously wrong. Bullets are incredibly underpowered in this game. Even after buying a special upgrade that gives me massive bonus damage versus villagers, it still took way more bullets than it realistically should have. A game where bow and arrow > gun is one where the laws or reality are warped. There are 2 things in AOE III that keep me from giving it a 2 or 3. The first one is the home city option. Though it isn't exactly "Age of Empires" style, it did a nice job of motivating me to keep playing. After all, I can't just stop with a level 9 home city, I have to go to 10. And after that, why not 15? or 50? Another thing that was fairly well done was the graphics. I don't mean the troops. They all look like a mess of colored triangles. And the buildings just look like buildings. Nice, but nothing to write home about. I'm referring to the thrill I get from positioning 16 cannons in a circle around his town center and firing, watching pieces of it fly 50 feet into the air and land in a shattered heap on top of the mess that used to be a colony. The physics in the game, though also somewhat unrealistic, (Houses appear to weigh nothing, a 20 foot long chunk that must weigh at least 1 ton can be blasted straight up into the air and come back down as if it were a lego brick) are very fun and visually interesting. All in all, this is an okay game, but if you are expecting Age of Empires III, you won't get it. This is just another rts. Expand
  57. DannyR.
    Oct 29, 2005
    10
    Great game.
  58. P.R.
    Feb 6, 2006
    5
    40 bucks down the drain...so boring compared to WC3...the online play is buggy and laggy...and takes forever to get a decent game...hopefully empire at earth will be better.
  59. SImonP.
    Oct 20, 2005
    3
    Not as good as AOE2. Save your money.
  60. BlakeT.
    Oct 22, 2005
    3
    The only reason this game gets a 3 is because it is pretty to look at. At most, it is a nice screen saver. Really, if you are interested in the game and gameplay, go buy AOE2 Gold. This is essentially a watered-down version of what once was a classic. And, I've lost all respect for Gamespy! They obviously didn't play the same game I just bought. Don't waste your money. It The only reason this game gets a 3 is because it is pretty to look at. At most, it is a nice screen saver. Really, if you are interested in the game and gameplay, go buy AOE2 Gold. This is essentially a watered-down version of what once was a classic. And, I've lost all respect for Gamespy! They obviously didn't play the same game I just bought. Don't waste your money. It should hit the bargain bin in 6 months - wait it out if you must buy it. Expand
  61. ScottM.
    Jan 20, 2006
    8
    An inovative game with excelent graphics and gameplay that stands with the rest of the series. The Havok phisics make blowing your enemy off cliffs and across batlefields beautiful. The online is done quite well while it has a flaw. Only one online account can be created for every cd key and the account cannot be edited. The main game was ok but I would have rather seen it based on real An inovative game with excelent graphics and gameplay that stands with the rest of the series. The Havok phisics make blowing your enemy off cliffs and across batlefields beautiful. The online is done quite well while it has a flaw. Only one online account can be created for every cd key and the account cannot be edited. The main game was ok but I would have rather seen it based on real battles following Nepolian, war of 1912, seven years war or something like that, instead it portrayed a dull story about an old knighthood.Despite hte few quirks I still really recomend this game, it is beutiful and excellent for lans. Expand
  62. Matt
    Oct 6, 2006
    3
    I loved AoE one and two, they are the best! So I was over the moon to get this game and start playing.. What a shocking disappointment! This is not an AoE game, for one there are only 3 resources, and with that there is no resource pits anything that is gathered magically appears in your stack! Wheres the strategy and realism in that? I have only just started playing and I couldn't I loved AoE one and two, they are the best! So I was over the moon to get this game and start playing.. What a shocking disappointment! This is not an AoE game, for one there are only 3 resources, and with that there is no resource pits anything that is gathered magically appears in your stack! Wheres the strategy and realism in that? I have only just started playing and I couldn't see anywhere to set formations or stance of the trooops(maybe i just need my eyes tested). There are very few types of unit, and when you upgrade these you don't get "differant" units, they just get up ranked, eg "veteren musketeer" instead of "musketeer". On the other hand the graphics are nice, when buildings are attacked big chunks break off instead of the usual flames. But graphics are not everything, I want a "brunette" game not a "blonde" one! Buy Empire Earth 2 instead. Expand
  63. TomH.
    Jun 6, 2006
    10
    10 out of 10, absolutely brilliant, superb graphics, superb gamplay, online play is the best out of all the games features. i regularly play online mulitplayer, i rarely play the storylines. This game is a MUST if you have broadband.
  64. BobB.
    Jul 4, 2007
    10
    A must have for strategy game enthusiasts.
  65. NJacobs
    Apr 1, 2008
    1
    The fact that there is no save and load (!) in multiplayer games (even LAN) is a complete deal-breaker. Should have been stated on the package before we wasted a significant amount of money to play family LAN game. What were they thinking?. Very disappointing. Aside from that, the gameplay seems dumbed-down from AOE2, which would be tolerable, but the no save is not.
  66. ClaireG.
    Nov 17, 2005
    7
    Like all other AOE fans I waited eagerly. Love the new game love the graphics there is bound to be an add on which will be interesting and may please those who are understanderbly a bit disappointed after the wait and the hype.
  67. SashaC.
    Oct 13, 2005
    10
    Amazing graphics, unbeliaveable details, great AI and game playing.
  68. HenryM.
    Oct 15, 2005
    1
    Take the same old tired game formula rebrand and reissue with new graphics. In a nutshell this is AO3. Is there any original idea's left in the gaming industry? AO4 anyone? How long until gamers stop buying this reissue junk and send a message to game developers we want new ideas!!
  69. MikeT.
    Oct 17, 2005
    1
    Same game, different day.
  70. BlakeG
    Oct 22, 2005
    1
    I think it's hilarious how this magical train just appears out of no-where on one-way tracks, I think it's unacceptable that blatant things like issuing orders via the minimap (something I've been doing in RTS games for the past... 10 years?) made it to release. I find it absurd that I can dominate online making only musketeers every single game through every single age. I I think it's hilarious how this magical train just appears out of no-where on one-way tracks, I think it's unacceptable that blatant things like issuing orders via the minimap (something I've been doing in RTS games for the past... 10 years?) made it to release. I find it absurd that I can dominate online making only musketeers every single game through every single age. I order food shipments from my home city that need to be "harvested" - but when my workers are out there on the other side of the map chopping trees they magically get deposited into the wood-bank-account while that same worker doesn't move an inch from his chopping spot. Because I could go on, I Expand
  71. HansW.
    Oct 22, 2005
    9
    Cool game absolutly brilliant.
  72. Georgy
    Oct 26, 2005
    3
    The main problem with this game is that it is not historically based as the legacy, but it contains three boooooring fictitious stories where you are always pursuing somebody. Instead of Age of Empires, it should be called: Age of Mytology III I hoped campaigns related to Napoleon, Tzars, Henry the Eight, the French Revolution and ended up with Amelia... it sucks.
  73. DanielZandormaz
    May 23, 2008
    0
    There's no save game option in LAN Multiplaeyr game. It's a shame. The programmers are not good enough to find a solution for this lack? I wasted my money in this game because compared to AOE 2 this new version is worst!!! Following I will write in portuguese for more people know about those issues related to the Age oF emperes III:
    Esta nova versão até que
    There's no save game option in LAN Multiplaeyr game. It's a shame. The programmers are not good enough to find a solution for this lack? I wasted my money in this game because compared to AOE 2 this new version is worst!!! Following I will write in portuguese for more people know about those issues related to the Age oF emperes III:
    Esta nova versão até que poderia ser boa pois tem gráficos muito bons mas peca em diversos pontos. A versão 3 do Age Of Empires não tem a opção de salvar ou restaurar um jogo na opção de Multiplayer/ LAN. Isso é um absurdo para um jogo deste porte. O que aconteceu? Os programadores não encontraram uma solução para algum poblema relacionado a salvar/restaurar jogos multiplayer? Que decepção. Pior é que no site oficial do jogo não tem nenhuma explicação para isso.
    Expand
  74. Richard
    Nov 26, 2005
    1
    Buggy and way over-rated. Age II way better than Age III. Too many game flaws and on line is really buggy. Game gets boring fast ... even on line against real opponents but that also is flawed ... only one style of game play works. A waste of $$$.
  75. JoeS.
    Nov 16, 2005
    2
    I am a HUGE RTS fan and this game is an utter dissapointment. With all of the hype, it is truly frustrating to spend $60 on something that is not much better than the free demo. Save your money, or I'll sell mine for 1/2 price!
  76. Sep 3, 2010
    10
    Fantastic, the definitive RPG that hasn't been beat since. With all the little quirks that just make a game come to life.. such as the settlers happy responses to your every will and command, to sending your soldiers into battle, really makes you feel like you're in the Age of these Empires and you are god.. what more could you want from a game? Must Play.
  77. Oct 6, 2010
    5
    I thought this was going to be just asgood as Age of Empires II, but I was so wrong. Age of Empres II had more civilizations, better gameplay, and overall, a much better game than this!
  78. GlenMcGor
    Sep 9, 2005
    10
    From playing the demo, one can say that this might be the best Age series yet. Although some troubling issues with the Home City concept, and overall pathfinding issues might bring this gem in the making down. But let us wait for the final version, before we proclaim our verdict upoin ES.
  79. KevinR.
    Oct 19, 2005
    10
    Anyone who thinks the game sucks is smoking somthing.
  80. K.Dep
    Oct 31, 2005
    5
    Holy cripes is this game full of bugs!! Right off the store shelf the game crashed every 5 minutes, and I know what I'm doing so it's NOT my computer. There is a patch available, so get it right away. The game still crashes, but much less frequently. The sound rarely works. Microsoft has admitted the game has problems and will release another patch. The game itself is not bad, Holy cripes is this game full of bugs!! Right off the store shelf the game crashed every 5 minutes, and I know what I'm doing so it's NOT my computer. There is a patch available, so get it right away. The game still crashes, but much less frequently. The sound rarely works. Microsoft has admitted the game has problems and will release another patch. The game itself is not bad, just more of the same. The campaign mode is nothing special at all, with nothing anywhere near as interesting as Age of Mythologies. I liked that game far better for gameplay and storyline. AoE 3 is much the same, with some minor changes. I certainly regret paying $60 for the game. Wait for a price drop. Expand
  81. Sep 24, 2010
    2
    Horrible game. It might have looked good, but it was repetitive, boring drivel. The stroy was decent but the voice acting totally tore the whole game apart. Skirmish was never different, not like games such as Dawn of War 40K or Starcraft, which had at least a little bit of difference in their skirmishes. I found it utterly atrocious.
  82. Jan 11, 2013
    2
    Ugh, the graphics even for the time (not even that long ago) were appalling and it hurt my eyes, it takes forever to install, has plenty of bugs and data seems to get corrupted easily, which caused me to re-install a few times (my computer was perfectly fine). Now the single-player is just dreadful, the game-play is 100% dull and the missions have no depth whatsoever, what's more is theUgh, the graphics even for the time (not even that long ago) were appalling and it hurt my eyes, it takes forever to install, has plenty of bugs and data seems to get corrupted easily, which caused me to re-install a few times (my computer was perfectly fine). Now the single-player is just dreadful, the game-play is 100% dull and the missions have no depth whatsoever, what's more is the way you usually go from one mission to another without an established connection and sometimes no explanation of what is going on is just laughable. I remember I didn't even know what I was doing in one of the missions and I had pretty much no fun with the single-player. I believe a game which is - vastly - inferior to it's predecessor in pretty much every way (even the multi-player - just look at the other negative reviews) deserves a terrible score innately. Expand
  83. Terry
    Jan 1, 2010
    2
    Wish I'd read this before buying AOE III! Waste of money. Civ meets Warcraft, but not as good as either. Can't save multiplayer games? Are you serious? Does anyone know how I can get a refund. I've had the game nearly 3 days! Almost new!!
  84. DanB.
    Aug 26, 2007
    0
    Clearly a complete disappointment compared to the amazing and wonderful Age of Empires 2. This game lacks in all areas that a great RTS game has ever had. Limited towers? What is up with that! Units that all look and feel the same? Wow that was real innovative! Railroads you cant build walls over or gates over, wow, just what i want, a nice gaping hole in wall. Age of Empires 2 was an Clearly a complete disappointment compared to the amazing and wonderful Age of Empires 2. This game lacks in all areas that a great RTS game has ever had. Limited towers? What is up with that! Units that all look and feel the same? Wow that was real innovative! Railroads you cant build walls over or gates over, wow, just what i want, a nice gaping hole in wall. Age of Empires 2 was an amazing game. Its sad to see that they desired to drop the ball on the Zone supporting the game so now you cant even find anyone to play online anymore. They lost a large community just to push everyone toward Age of Crap 3. Ensemble Studios has defiantly took a turn for the worse. The card system is just stupid. It makes anyone that doesn't know how to get resources quickly and efficiently suddenly become really good at the game with a click of a button. The peasants don't have to return to the town center or lumber mill to receive the resources makes people not think about how they make there base before they build is because hey, you can have that 1 guy in the middle of the forest on the other side of the map getting resources for you and he doesn't have to run a mile to return them, he just happens to have a massive infinite strength to be able to hold it all just for you. I thought about giving it a 2, but then i thought, thats too generous. This game is the worst game ever made and should be avoided by all RTS Enthusiasts. Trust me, it is not worth it. Complete and udder failure just like Red Faction 2 was to Red Faction 1. Expand
  85. Jun 27, 2013
    0
    Absolute worst multiplayer system/support I have ever seen for a game. 3/4 of the time you can't join a game due to a connection issue, either with friends or strangers. Unless you want to play single player only, AVOID.
  86. ArtyT.
    Jun 8, 2006
    4
    Dissapointment!!! AOE 2 was so much better, much more balanced. This is more like RPG when the game begins, the explorer runs around collecting stuff and getting experience points. Very colorful though, what the Microsoft should have done is to take the Sim City 4 and just have the sims fight.
  87. Feb 24, 2012
    9
    Great game really, different than othe AOE games, this game is based on building your colony in the new world with getting shipment from your home city, the system of home city is really great, building a deck and unlocking new shipment is very intersting and will keep you playing, there are a lot of ways to play for every nation in the game and they are vastly different, the skirmish modeGreat game really, different than othe AOE games, this game is based on building your colony in the new world with getting shipment from your home city, the system of home city is really great, building a deck and unlocking new shipment is very intersting and will keep you playing, there are a lot of ways to play for every nation in the game and they are vastly different, the skirmish mode is brilliant, maps and graphics are beautiful, the sound is very crisp and suitable, for such a game released in 2005, this game really lives on (graphics for example is better than the new rts SH3), go to multiplayer you will see a lt of people still playing, you wont find any new game like this style (Historic RTS) anymore so you just have this great game. Get the complete edition with the two expantions, and you will play it forever. Expand
  88. Sep 18, 2012
    8
    i used to be an AoE II player.now i play Aoe III quite often.i see the game was released in 2005.compared to other games in the same period,this game's the graphic was extremely outstanding.now people play games with a much stricker attitude since more games are available.
    some sections was cut in this game:theres no more the US,USSR,Spain (they do exist in mods though),etc.and there are
    i used to be an AoE II player.now i play Aoe III quite often.i see the game was released in 2005.compared to other games in the same period,this game's the graphic was extremely outstanding.now people play games with a much stricker attitude since more games are available.
    some sections was cut in this game:theres no more the US,USSR,Spain (they do exist in mods though),etc.and there are no more airplanes no more more weapons.
    Expand
  89. Aug 13, 2012
    8
    Technically is amazing, and it haves a great campaign. Let's not forget about one of the most exiting parts, Skirmish. It's really addictive to level up and upgrade your city. And the Home City option is really good, but the gameplay seems exactly the same, so that's why It's not amazing. But still with the great story and worth adds, this game is a must buy. 87 out of 100
  90. Apr 12, 2013
    7
    this game is good only in graphic. gameplay is overly simplified and many flaws in execution of strategy really ruins the game. it tries to give players impression that gameplays are diversified and interesting but all come down to whoever is fast at making unit and economy wins the game in most cases.
    also micro rarely matters which sucks cuz strategy game is meant to give skilled people
    this game is good only in graphic. gameplay is overly simplified and many flaws in execution of strategy really ruins the game. it tries to give players impression that gameplays are diversified and interesting but all come down to whoever is fast at making unit and economy wins the game in most cases.
    also micro rarely matters which sucks cuz strategy game is meant to give skilled people edgy to win game
    controls are clunky and expect lots of lag when u play online( this is 7 years old game)
    community is nasty and when u lose in teamgame everyone calls out each other
    in a word, go buy recent rts like sc2:hots
    Expand
  91. Nov 3, 2012
    8
    I had a lot of fun playing this, With a total game play of 25 Hours to play the Complete Edition.
    The only issue i really had is that it did get quite repetitive after a while.

    The details are still pretty good for a older game, The story was fun to for me at least.
    I did get this game on sale though, I'm not sure if i would spend the full price on it. (37 Euro).
  92. Jun 17, 2013
    10
    un excelente juego con varias cosas por destacar entre estas la originalidad y hermosos mapas con cosas grandes por descubrir dentro de el, un buen tema musical.
    Lo que lamento es el pixelado pero no es algo tan grave para bajarle calificacion
  93. Sep 2, 2013
    10
    EXCELENCIA Y PERFECCIÓN, esta gran combinación es mi favorita, en especial si se habla de un videojuego, si se habla de AGE OF EMPIRES, con esta tercera entrega el juego logra mejorar en varios aspectos, logra entretener y lo mas importante divertir al jugador, muy original y logra mostrar la capacidad que tiene MICROSOFT de impresionar.
  94. Feb 15, 2014
    10
    best game ever. you can't compare it with aoe2, another world. i need the 150 words aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
  95. Apr 14, 2014
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This Game according to me.................is ONE OF THE GREATEST GAMES EVER, I have tried AoE2 (this is technically a venn diagram of the 2) and it is a mess, 1-Villagers must return to homebase or whatever building just to return resouces I mean, 1 second your villager is carrying resources, the next he gets creamed leaving you with a dead colony. Also for those ofyou who think the campaigns are lame, but atleast it combines a little myth, I mean it doesn't mean it's completely magic, in AoE2 you've got several short campaigns, with what? No interrelation Now I really don't have time to write all of this but here's a comparison of the 2
    AoE3/AoE2
    3d/2d
    Guns/All Swords
    Fast by 5 training/Slow by 1 training
    Special Effects/No Obvious Special Effects
    Fast Resource Collection/Slow Resource Collection
    Home Cities and Cards/No Cards nor Home Cities
    Good Skirmish Mode/Horrible Skirmish mode
    Expand
  96. May 23, 2015
    8
    CZ:
    Fantastická real-time strategie ze staré školy. Nádherná grafika, fungující fyzika a celková myšlenka Age of Empires, která nikdy neomrzí. Dobové zasazení je perfektní, jako zbytečnost hodnotím systém domovských měst. Je také škoda, že ve hře je oproti druhému dílu menší možnost výběru ras.
  97. Nov 13, 2014
    10
    I must be one of the only people on Earth who prefers AoE3 to its predecessor. 2 is heavy on micromanagement and the mechanics highly favor a defensive strategy, whereas 3 streamlines many elements to cut down on micro; in that regard, I find 3 to be more accommodating of a wider range of strategies, including more high-risk and aggressive options.

    AoE2 is for tactics lovers who want to
    I must be one of the only people on Earth who prefers AoE3 to its predecessor. 2 is heavy on micromanagement and the mechanics highly favor a defensive strategy, whereas 3 streamlines many elements to cut down on micro; in that regard, I find 3 to be more accommodating of a wider range of strategies, including more high-risk and aggressive options.

    AoE2 is for tactics lovers who want to maneuver individual units in precise ways, exploiting the game's idiosyncrasies to their fullest. AoE3 can justifiably be criticized for offering fewer rewards for system mastery in this regard. However, I feel that this shortcoming is more than made up for by the new opportunities that are presented once the player's attention is no longer be focused on the minute details of individual soldiers' actions.

    On its own merits, AoE3 is a gorgeous depiction of Enlightenment warfare. The greatest highlight is the Home City system, which adds a great deal of character and uniqueness to each civilization in a way that rewards extended play. I don't know how many hours I spent mastering the Dutch and the Russians - each civilization is unique in play style to begin with, and the Home City adds an entirely new and rewarding layer of depth to strategic decision-making each session. It's perhaps a borrowed feature from the grand strategy or 4X genres, but it blends seamlessly with the established RTS mechanics.

    The second greatest talking point is the naval warfare system - the variety and utility of various ship classes is fantastic, as is the separate population pool for naval units. The only complaint I have is that there are few maps that really give the navy room to play a dominant role in earning the victory.

    Of course, the fundamental gameplay mechanics set down in previous editions remain as solid as ever.

    I must have spent hundreds of hours with this game in high school summers. Now that it's available on Steam, I may spend a few hundred more...

    P.S.: watching your infantry chuck Molotov cocktails and flaming trash at enemy buildings, which are incrementally blown to smithereens in a truly spectacular fashion, is a treat. :)
    Expand
  98. Jan 7, 2014
    8
    Played it for days but the game isn't so attractive. Age of 2 and 1 was more attractive because these two games chosen more interesting topics like Medieval and Civilizations of First Age.
  99. Jan 27, 2014
    7
    I am going to start off by saying that I am a big fan of the Total War series and I like it better then age of empires so I am biased against this series. I had a lot of fun with this game but then I found the Total War series. Total War trumps this game in all ways except the AI is better in age of empire. If you want fun game get this but if you want a vary fun game get one Total war games.
  100. Aug 8, 2014
    8
    The game is good for strategy game. The storyline history is the purpose of game. However the game is not very popular. Although the gameplay and graphic is good.
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 52 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 40 out of 52
  2. Negative: 0 out of 52
  1. Those looking for a complex and interesting real-time strategy game with fantastic good looks and some historical flavor will find just what they want in Age of Empires III.
  2. 70
    Age of Empires III takes the conservative approach to the conundrum of how to craft a new experience that remains faithful to the original. While that ensures fans will immediately feel at home with an old friend, it's questionable whether it sets another standard, or merely follows its own.
  3. Age of Empires III would be a damn fine RTS if it came out five years ago. Instead, it's some impressive modern technology and bold gameplay ideas unfortunately saddled by an outdated take on the genre.