Sword of the Stars PC

User Score
7.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 69 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 48 out of 69
  2. Negative: 15 out of 69
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  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 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 forumsVery 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. Expand
  2. BrianL.
    Jul 29, 2006
    2
    Dated graphics. Horribly hokey voice acting. Clunky and practically useless tutorial. Gave up on the demo after half an hour. Don't waste your time.
  3. ScottD.
    Aug 1, 2006
    2
    The strategic screen lacks depth. Everything is too simple, making the game, at best, frustrating to play. The tactical element seems incomplete and the controls are unintuitive and clumbsy. If you buy this game, expect to watch your ships fire at each other with little control over what goes on. *My opinion based on extensive demo play*
  4. mobius
    Aug 29, 2006
    2
    took me well over 120 turns before ui came accross the AI and even then it was a total tank rush. the game is to big to be enjoyed properly. research is not helpful at all and you have no idea what planets you control have on them. the game just becomes a chore when you start to spread out into the galaxy as each turn just gets longer and longer an more tedious. Take my advice and stick took me well over 120 turns before ui came accross the AI and even then it was a total tank rush. the game is to big to be enjoyed properly. research is not helpful at all and you have no idea what planets you control have on them. the game just becomes a chore when you start to spread out into the galaxy as each turn just gets longer and longer an more tedious. Take my advice and stick to the current king of the hill Galactic Civilizations 2: Expand
  5. BobM.
    Aug 4, 2006
    1
    The interface is clunky, non-intuitive, and lacks feedback (am I researching this technology? It would be really great if the game could tell me if I was!). The people on the Kerberos forms are rabid fanboys who attack anybody for even gently criticizing the game, and the lead developer may just be more arrogant and opinionated than Derek Smart. The game as it is is extremely poor, andThe interface is clunky, non-intuitive, and lacks feedback (am I researching this technology? It would be really great if the game could tell me if I was!). The people on the Kerberos forms are rabid fanboys who attack anybody for even gently criticizing the game, and the lead developer may just be more arrogant and opinionated than Derek Smart. The game as it is is extremely poor, and given the attitude of the devs, I sincerely doubt that anybody who buys the game and requests changes or added features will be given the time of day. It's just not worth it, folks. There might be a game here, but between the arrogance of the devs and the sloppiness of the game, it's not worth it - even for a budget title. Expand
  6. SC
    Oct 23, 2006
    2
    Some really cool features, but the interface is horrible to use and combat is very difficult. I wound up having my ships move away from my viewable screen and was unable to retreive them. As one of the critic reviews said, there are some really good features in this title that should probably be in a better game.
  7. AtmaD.
    Jul 28, 2006
    2
    This game seems at first like it would be the breakthough stragerty everyone wants, but you quickly find that it is not. There are hardly any choices during combat, the 'planatry' coltrols are also extremly limited. I think the only GOOD thing about this game is the tech tree.. very nice there. Also, the AI (At least for me) was a little overpowerd..even when the game was set on This game seems at first like it would be the breakthough stragerty everyone wants, but you quickly find that it is not. There are hardly any choices during combat, the 'planatry' coltrols are also extremly limited. I think the only GOOD thing about this game is the tech tree.. very nice there. Also, the AI (At least for me) was a little overpowerd..even when the game was set on easy... within 15 minutes of every game, they rolled right over me, and usualy with less advanced, and less numbers, of ships. Expand
  8. 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 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!
  9. Brakiri
    Aug 23, 2006
    2
    Ugly graphics, simplified gameplay, horrible speech. Deleted the demo after 30min of torture.
  10. 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 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 whoYou 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. Expand
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. 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.
  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. Game Informer
    75
    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]