Metascore
68

Mixed or average reviews - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 23
  2. Negative: 3 out of 23
  1. While Sword of the Stars doesn't possess the battlefield variety of the "Homeworld" games that inspired it, it remains an ambitious and engrossing strategy triumph. [Nov. 2006, p.78]
  2. In much the same way that "Total War" proved that the war game could be stunning to look at, accessible and fun, SOTS is almost as impressive in its own low-budget way. [Oct 2006, p.76]
  3. One of the best “pick up and play” renditions of a 4X space strategy title I’ve seen to date, and with the possibility of third-party mods opening up and even an expansion pack, I’m looking forward to seeing that the future brings for this interesting title.
  4. In spite of some minor ambiguity as concerns the control interface, it's a game that has a fairly shallow learning curve, yet promises much in the way of long term amusement for those who don’t like their 4X to be too taxing.
  5. If you let it, Sword of the Stars will consume your life. You'll forget you have a girlfriend or a job, you'll rush home from school (or simply not go) to carry on playing and that's exactly what a great sim should do.
  6. 77
    I love the slick, high-tech look of the interface. A little more functionality would be nice, of course, but the game looks much more futuristic and advanced than any other space empire game on the market.
  7. The lack of variety of units is hurtful, but not as much as the lack of information when selecting parts for your ships or after a battle has been fought.
  8. Even with a well-balanced multiplayer experience, I can't say that Sword of the Stars is incredibly ambitious, but it's definitely an entertaining and accessible way to extend your galactic influence. [Sept. 2006, p.99]
  9. Despite some flaws with the combat, Sword of the Stars distills the complex space strategy formula to a slick, streamlined, and enjoyable package.
  10. An involving game, with interesting varied strategic options and challenges thrown at the player.
  11. The battles look and sound nice, but do not offer much in terms of tactics and are often frustrating because of the ship captains' low IQ. [Oct 2006]
  12. It's a snap to learn and a breeze to play, whether tackling one of its half-dozen goal-driven scenarios or wrangling with a few friends online.
  13. While a bit of a lopsided contender in the 4X market, those with a propensity for responding violently to problems - like me - will have little trouble stepping right into the shoes Sword of the Stars offer.
  14. Get over the interface and the steep learning curve (even beyond the tutorial, which is a bit light) and this is a stylish strategy game that, while hardly threatening to take over your life, will certainly provide a lot of challenge and reward for the time you invest in it.
  15. If you're coming to Sword of the Stars from titles like "Galactic Civilizations," things may seem stripped down... but "focused" is a more accurate way to look at it.
  16. Solid, but hampered mostly by a terrible lack of depth. [Oct 2006, p.95]
  17. Combat is a breeze and the four playable races create some intriguing situations. Yet, for a game of this type, the interface issues are almost inexcusable and the relative simplicity of the game only makes these problems all the more frustrating.
  18. 60
    The races behave in unique, meaningful ways and we really appreciate the attempt to minimize the strategic tedium. That’s why it’s so strange to see a game that is clearly trying hard to attract new players to the genre come up with an interface that is at time incredibly hostile.
  19. 60
    Sword of the Stars is full of solid ideas and offers interesting strategic challenges and fun multiplayer action to those willing to weather its quirks, frustrations and obscurities.
  20. 55
    This is perhaps the only game in the genre to actually make each race feel unique and balanced... However, it isn't enough to compensate for the flawed tactical combat that lies at the game's core; nothing save a complete overhaul can redeem SotS from its current mediocrity.
  21. An idea tangled in shoddy design. [Oct 2006, p.86]
  22. 40
    There are some really cool ideas here that belong in a better game: the tech tree, the random encounters, command ratings, and the shipbuilding, for instance.
  23. The inevitable galaxy of patches to come will surely help, but for now, the vacuum abides. [Nov. 2006, p.82]
User Score
7.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 65 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 27 out of 38
  2. Negative: 10 out of 38
  1. Oct 31, 2011
    0
    Very disappointed in this game. Was released on October 28th through Steam, but Paradox changed the release date to the 31st for physicalVery disappointed in this game. Was released on October 28th through Steam, but Paradox changed the release date to the 31st for physical copies and I can see why. The original released version was a Beta, wrong file uploaded to Steam, I understand mistakes happen, so another version was uploaded the following day. Well nothing really changed and the publisher admitted on their forums that they knew the product was bad they were going to release and patch it. Menus are grayed out so they cannot be selected, such as options, no scenarios maps but a tab, the encyclopedia which they tell you to use for information appears to be mostly empty. The manual was a draft copy that the published put on the forums, how do you not have a manual completed for release? The graphics are beautiful but without just clicking around its next to impossible to figure out how anything works. No tutorial, no intro missions, no manual, no encyclopedia. Horrible game, horrible release. Full Review »
  2. OrdvaagMcSizzle
    Jan 12, 2009
    0
    You can always tell who the fanboys and shills are in these comments because they always give the game a 10 and their entire comment isYou can always tell who the fanboys and shills are in these comments because they always give the game a 10 and their entire comment is dedicated to addressing and refuting other people's comments, rather than justifying the 10 rating. They want you to think that it's a crime to not like a game, and to call a turd a turd. This game is a turd. It is a 4X game for people who don't like 4X games. Why they can't just go back to playing The Sims, who knows. Conversely, therefore, people who do like 4X games will not like this game, because it lacks everything that makes 4X games good and distinctive and addictive. Full Review »
  3. CharlesD
    Aug 11, 2006
    1
    haha, it looks like Tir M is the developer from the game company, how he know so much!. Dude, this game sucks man. whatever the lead artisthaha, it looks like Tir M is the developer from the game company, how he know so much!. Dude, this game sucks man. whatever the lead artist did the terrible job. it looks like the game from the way TOO Future...like planet of apes age hahaha. 4 races, but no tech defferents? and Bob M is right. this game devloper is one arrogant dude~ man! Full Review »