Armies of Exigo PC

Metascore
69

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 12 out of 31
  2. Negative: 1 out of 31
Buy On
  1. It is simply one of the best handling RTS games that I’ve ever played, and I played just about all of them.
  2. One good thing is that players will face little to no slow down even with a huge battle going on in the middle of the screen.
  3. Pelit (Finland)
    84
    Unfortunately, Exigo comes from the big book of fantasy strategy clichés and does not bring anything new to the genre.Still, it is a well done real-time strategy and definitely worth its price. [Jan. 05]
  4. 80
    With great looks, a clever multi-layer mechanic, and well devised sides, one wonders why Electronic Arts would release a game this good at a time this bad.
  5. 80
    The game's saving graces are its graphics and well-balanced races, and if you crave long backbreaking campaigns, you'll find plenty to keep you occupied here, but it's too bad that Black Hole couldn't have fleshed out the game's embryonic innovations to deliver something more daring and less imitative.
  6. 80
    Exigo's multileveled gameplay is a good first step in an interesting direction, but unfortunately, that's not always enough to compete in the brutally competitive RTS genre. With more tweaking, Armies of Exigo could definitely give Blizzard a run for its money. [Dec 2004, p.126]
  7. Game Informer
    80
    The super-group function and solo campaign level designs are particularly awesome. [Dec 2004, p.188]
  8. Computer Gaming World
    80
    Calling it an homage, an interpretation, a clone, or even a rip-off doesn't change the fact that it's a damn fine game. [March 2005, p.75]
  9. The most disappointing thing about Exigo is that the gameplay just isn’t all that exiting. Everything looks nice and is well-balanced, but there’s little here that hasn’t been done before.
  10. Strategy fans will be more tolerant of the difficulty and may enjoy the chance to return to the roots of RTS gameplay without putting up with 1990s graphics.
  11. It is easy to pick up and play, it is gorgeous, and it provides a few new elements yet seen by fans of RTS games.
  12. Seems to take too much from too many other real-time strategy games, and fails to capitalize and to create its own niche.
  13. Even the interface is out of the olden days.
  14. PC Gamer
    73
    Seems more like a cosmetic upgrade to a game we played to death two years ago rather than a truly new experience. [Holiday 2004, p.92]
  15. With so much effort put into Being Whatevercraft, it's a real shame that a bit more time wasn't spent on really trying to surpass it, rather than just being a solid game that's as ultimately memorable as a disembowel movement. [Dec 2004, p.89]
  16. It's not a classic of the genre, but it gets the job done and has outstanding graphics and animation work.
  17. If you think you’d enjoy playing an RTS you played 4 years ago, but with wickedly updated graphics/sound/cut scenes and with a dual layered map, then by all means pick [it] up.
  18. 70
    This is definitely a game aimed at the hardcore, old school crowd. Newcomers to the real-time strategy genre will find that the campaign is difficult to the point of near total aggravation.
  19. AceGamez
    70
    It's not the deepest strategy game ever made, but it does provide a few hours of lightweight strategic fun here and there, even if most of what it does has been done better elsewhere.
  20. The gameplay is very much like that of the earliest real-time strategy games. This is a traditional RTS that seemingly ignores all the advances that the genre has experienced over the past several years.
  21. The gameplay is standard, if sometimes uneven and difficult, and the units aren’t anything we haven’t seen before.
  22. 60
    The artificial intelligence is also AWOL. The alertness of each unit is figured individually, and not shared even amongst a group.
  23. AOE proudly champions these genre cliches, but in doing so, buries the old-school for good.
  24. The gameplay is a castrated version of "Warcraft III" - you can see the hallmarks of a fine specimen, but the testosterone is all long gone - while the script is cringeworthy in places, reminiscent of the very worst desperate "Lord of the Rings" wannabes in fantasy fiction writing.
  25. Something of a one trick pony. It’s all done competently, and there’s certainly enjoyment to be found here, but it lacks character; that exciting spark or polish that distinguishes the truly great RTS games. Once the novelty of the dual layer system wears off you’ll pine for a fresher, less workman-like, experience.
  26. 60
    The reliance on old school game mechanics does make the game dated. It’s a bit like playing a clone of the original Doom after you’ve finished Half-Life 2.
  27. Anything that was good about Armies of Exigo is irreparably ruined by the woefully cliché story, simplicity, repetitive mission objectives and often dimwitted AI. I would have forgiven it all that, if only it hadn't been so boring.
  28. No matter how hard you search, there's little here that wasn't done by StarCraft, Age of Empires or any other recent RTS... There's no worthy inovation here to raise this above any other title. [Jan 2005, p.114]
  29. Cheat Code Central
    50
    You're going to have to play this game for a long time to learn how to win, or you may just get lucky and get all of the sequences rights.
  30. Computer Games Magazine
    50
    For the most part, this is RTS 101... all over again. [March 2005, p.77]
  31. A playable RTS and even marginally entertaining, but that’s only because its developers blatantly adopted every single hackneyed RTS convention they could get their hands on. Even the fall guy has enough self-respect to avoid doing that.
User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 42 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 14
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 14
  3. Negative: 4 out of 14
  1. Jul 28, 2012
    9
    Game play is good, graphics are good, the story is good, the units are all good..what more does a game need? Apparently something new? Tho iGame play is good, graphics are good, the story is good, the units are all good..what more does a game need? Apparently something new? Tho i fail to see what new every one is talking about. You mean like flying ships and units that can make mineshaft to quickly transport units from one location to the other?

    This is a game people clearly have miss judged solely on the fact that it got aliens and a familiar conflict in it. People see the beast men and they all yell the Hord! Riiiiiip offff!!!! aghhh!!!! then they spams and falls over. Then they notice a third faction called the fallen and notice that they got bug units and guess what....they all yell Zerglings! Riiiiiip offff!!!! aghhh!!!! then they spams and falls over.

    And that seals the fate of Armies of Exigo cause after all that falling over all people see is a clone of a clone of clones?

    Then comes all the complains, wahhh i can only control 16 units wahhhhh. Answer: Then make a super group with the F1 - F12 key dumbass.
    Wahhhhh heroes don't lvl up and you can't out fit them with items :( sniff , can't see how that's such a surprise as its Called Armies of Exigo and not Heroes and Armies of Exigo. In fact that comes to show that its not a copy of Warcraft 3 at least as their you can make all the love you want with your hero witch is everything in that game.

    Personally i find Armies of Exigo to be a great game, units gain experience for their kills, you got flying units that not only can transport your units but your archers can attack from within them. A good variety of units in all the factions, and once again a good story. Honestly there really should not be any need for any more to be said to convince you that Armies of Exigo is a great game. Its not a copy of Warcraft and Starcraft its not, its not a lie that its similar but calling it a rip off and a copy is going to far. In the end one more thing to add, Armies of Exigo is hard and gives a challenge and deserves my personal rating of 9/10.
    Full Review »
  2. TS
    Jun 10, 2008
    8
    while it is rather slow and dull compared to modern games, it brought something new which has lain untouched ever since. The multi-layer mapswhile it is rather slow and dull compared to modern games, it brought something new which has lain untouched ever since. The multi-layer maps brought a new dynamic to gameplay, and the cutscenes were well worth the wait, adding a darker feel than Warcraft 3.
    I understand the anger at the unchanging "Good guys look good, bad guys look bad" format the average RTS has taken, but remember that the high fantasy which is based upon Tolkein's works is based upon metaphor as well. If you are evil you look evil, if you are sly you have an evil feel to you but might look better. Its not complicated and really not something to get upset over.
    Full Review »
  3. NodD.
    Feb 4, 2005
    10
    Marvellous RTS.