Generally favorable reviews - based on 52 Critics What's this?

User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 346 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Age of Empires III offers gamers the next level of realism, with advanced battle physics and unparalleled visual detail. The new game picks up where Age of "Empires II: Age of Kings" left off, placing gamers in the position of a European power determined to explore, colonize and conquer the New World. This time period features stunning scenes, from towering European cathedrals to courageous tribes of Native Americans, and spectacular combat with Industrial Age units like rifled infantry, cavalry and tall ships bristling with cannons. Age of Empires III excites strategy gamers with new game-play elements, including the concept of a "Home City," new civilizations, units, technologies and an immersive new single-player campaign that will span three generations. [Ensemble Studios] Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 40 out of 52
  2. Negative: 0 out of 52
  1. 100
    An absolutely fantastic title with superb graphics and tight gameplay. Single-player or multiplayer, no matter what your skill, you'll get hours of joy out of this sucker online or off.
  2. Balanced, innovative, gorgeous. Truly worthy of the series. [Holiday 2005, p.52]
  3. This game is pure, unadulterated fun.
  4. 80
    Ultimately, AOE III has clearly won the battle for graphical supremacy, but for all its improvements elsewhere, it has yet to win the war for RTS dominance.
  5. There's no question that Age of Empires III is enjoyable, and the strong multiplayer modes make it worth owning. It's just that it doesn’t strive hard enough to truly usher in a new age of the genre.
  6. Eventually even the most diehard series zealots are going to begin to ask themselves why they are still in the same place playing the same game they were playing nearly a decade ago. While the genre has grown, the series that helped to spearhead games of this type into the public eye has stayed disturbingly static.
  7. The kind of design innovation that could make this game great, yet ends up demonstrating the game's schizophrenia. [Jan 2006, p.56]

See all 52 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 64 out of 100
  2. Negative: 21 out of 100
  1. Yablo
    Jan 9, 2006
    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. Expand
  2. MarkR.
    Apr 24, 2006
    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
  3. Mar 7, 2013
    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 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
  4. Jan 7, 2014
    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. Expand
  5. Jan 27, 2014
    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. Expand
  6. Hilly
    Nov 2, 2005
    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
  7. DanB.
    Aug 26, 2007
    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

See all 100 User Reviews