Age Of Empires III
List Price: $49.99

Our Price: $40.90

You Save: $9.09 (18%)

 


Product Description

You've landed on the New World. Ready to stake your claim? So is everybody else. So have some before you. Many will follow after you. How do you attain satisfaction, wealth, and power? Then manage to keep it? It takes lots of strategic thinking. If you think other are standing idylly by, you're wrong. It's going to be rough and nasty. Crush your enemies with devastating cannons, rifled, infantry, and your naval fleet. Build a thriving empire with a booming economy. Form strategic alliances with Native Americans. UNIVERSAL BINARY - Works with both Intel and PowerPC Macs GameSpy Top 5 Game of the Year 2005 award System Requirements (tentative) - Macintosh computer with a G4/G5 or Intel processor running at 1.4GHz or faster, Mac OS X v10.3.9 or higher, 512MB RAM, 64 MB Video Card (with support for hardware T & L). 56K dial-up Internet access or LAN for online play

Features:
  • Explore uncharted territories to stake your claim in the New World
  • Command powerful rifled infantry and a naval fleet
  • Gain valuable experience to level-up your Home City and strengthen your economy, technology, and military
  • Lead one of 8 civilizations - Spanish, French, British, Dutch, Russian, German, Portuguese, and Ottoman
  • Fully 3D graphics, destructible environments and dynamic physics

Customer Reviews:

  • Amazing strategy game!
    Age of Empires is the best strategy/war game ever!
    But you gonna need time to play.. coz takes some hours to play..! you know, until you make an army and kill you oponent..
    but is very fun! and try the multiplayer game, and we will see if you have the best strategy.....
    hope helped you....more info
  • Not a war game, but still great fun!!
    This game is great fun if you are interested in fantasy/colonial times or in building towns, villages and empires. If you are looking for a war game, I wouldn't suggest it. It's pretty basic strategies that win this game and most of it has to do with economics and improving your village, not your army (although that has something to do with it obviously). In the previews they show large armies with columns and rows of soldiers and stuff...yeah that doesn't happen, I mean, unless you spend a while organizing them to march in formation or something. The fighting is not visually satisfying, I guess is what I'm saying. But if you don't mind that, or if you like the Sims games but you've always wanted more control or like colonial times, horses and forests better than cities, houses and cars, than this is for you.

    If that is the case, than this game is a blast! The strategies are pretty easy to pick up and the visuals are amazing!

    One complaint I have and part of the reason why this is four stars instead of five is that I still can't figure out how to switch between countries. I can only play as the British. I want to play the spanish or the dutch or something! And the menus are a little hard to navigate. Other than that, I would highly suggest it....more info
  • Beautiful but Imperfect
    I'm really more on the fence about this game than my score indicates. It's really more of a 3.5 than a 4.

    As for the Pros, first of all it's gorgeous. The game utilizes different lighting very effectively which provides different regions of the American hemisphere their own unique aura (for the most part). The Yukon winter, the subtropical fauna, the Caribbean waters, and the New England fall are all portrayed very well. It's also nice to see such a variety of regions portrayed (who else would have thought to include Patagonia but Ensemble?).

    Next, the graphics engine really is a pioneer among RTS games. To see a cannonball shot from a culverin, scream over the landscape, smash into a town center, blow out the windows and a corner from the building's steeple, come out the other side, and come to a rolling stop a few relative feet from the building with splinters falling around it sets a standard that no other RTS from here on out can afford to not meet. No more scripted death scenes no matter the style of death. In AOE3, if you get plugged by cannonshot, as in real life you don't fall dead where you're struck. You careen 10 yards back, flop around, and then you die. It opens the door for more realistic (and potentially horrific) gameplay than any other RTS has.

    Also, I like the combat style. Some don't because it can take away the hold-your-breath moment when two armies collide in hand-to-hand combat like AOE2 was able to preserve. However, AOE3 has done a good job at making the stand-around style of 17th, 18th century combat more exciting than it could be otherwise, particularly with visuals supplied by the smoke registering from the musket barrels. Unlike other games such as Empire Earth where soldiers of this time frame appear to just flash lights at each other, in AOE3 there's no question that the two sides are shooting weapons primed with gunpowder. This is especially true on the high seas with ships firing broadsides at one another.

    However, I shall also use this point to start highlighting the Cons of the game. First of all, armies during this time period tended to be very ornate and march almost in parade fashion - even in the face of fire. Flags flew, drums tapped, officers shouted commands to their troops, and those troops, especially the regulars, tended to be disciplined, disciplined, disciplined. Even in the New World. The game should have provided these kind of units (and not just via the scenario editor where they currently exist). Flag-bearers or drummers could provide combat bonuses so as to encourage their presence and keep them from being superfluous. It's been done before (think Lord of the Rings).

    The game should have also provided a larger variety of formations on both land and water. It has effectively taken a step back from AOE2:the Conquerors which opened up some formations to armies and finally allowed you to keep those capricious and moronic ships from going off on their own and getting in each other's way. Now we're back to the original AOE. Games are supposed to evolve - not devolve.

    Also, and this is one of my biggest complaints, diplomacy is gone from single-player. Completely. In an age where international law was born and treaties played such an important part in activities in the New World, I find it incomprehensible that Ensemble, so committed to providing a balanced perspective on history, would decide to boil this period down to something a hair beyond cavemen clubbing each other. What they did in AOE2 was fine. You could start off allied, neutral, or an enemy and you had full control over that at any time. You could potentially bribe someone to be your ally (or at least not your enemy) or you could help them to defeat a common enemy and then turn around and stab them in the back. It kept you on your toes because, like people tend to do, nations could change their minds. Not so here. In skirmish mode, you're either someone's ally or their enemy. There is no neutrality. There is no bartering for favors. The game is simply black and white despite its many colors. AOE3 devolving again.

    I'm also not fond of the campaign. I think the story-line campaign, with its semi-interesting plot, doesn't do near as much for the history of the New World as separate campaigns based on the lives of key figures do. Because of AOE2, people now know more about El Cid and Saladin than they would have known otherwise. AOE3 could have done campaigns based on the exploits of Pizarro or an Incan leader (to avoid a recap of the Montezuma campaign in The Conquerors), the Marquis de Montcalm, a whole campaign devoted to Simon Bolivar, Pontiac, or on particular wars such as Queen Anne's War or the Seven Year's War (and not just a shoddy blip in the campaign story that it currently is). I know that the game isn't supposed to be just a pure history lesson but the previous AOEs did nothing wrong with those campaigns. In AOE3, Ensemble has attempted to fix something that isn't broken. This point of view is further vindicated by the return to the AOE2 campaign format in The Asian Dynasties.

    To wrap it up, I love the choice in time period, I love the graphics, and I like the combat (I don't buy the arguments that the fighting ends up becoming just a mesh of humanity when things get hand-to-hand. That's what ALWAYS happens. Even for those armies who like to stay in formation and keep discipline e.g. Roman legions, hand-to-hand always becomes messy and disordered.). But this game is like a ditzy cheerleader - nice to look at but not much substance....more info
  • Toooooo Short
    I like the game, but am very disapointed in it's length. I just started to get used to the controls and it's over. I only got it a couple of weeks ago and play it about 2 - 2.5 hours a day. I already finished it.

    ...more info
  • Good Sequel; Better With Expansions
    I first received this game about 2 years ago as a birthday present. From then on it has evolved to become my standard of a good RTS. The graphical, and game play improvement over AO2 is amazing. The home city is a vast improvement over AO2, and forces you to specialize in one civilization in order to unlock all of their advantages. My brothers also enjoy this game, so when they play me over our LAN network it keeps both of us on our toes and always guessing, much like real combat. The game does pull some controls out of other games, such as being able to zoom in yet it is actually a bit of a hassle since it gives you no advantage, and the movement often become blurry when you do this. One feature that the game is missing from AOM is the ability to pan the camera. You are still stuck facing the game from one angle. This makes it very difficult to view units behind buildings.

    I run the game on my iMac (1.83 ghz, 512mb RAM) and I can still run the game under the medium graphics with no apparent lag. While playing on my macbook (2.4 ghz, 2gb RAM) I run the game on the highest settings, and the graphical improvement is amazing. The water ripples with every movement of my ships, and the smoke from my rows of dragoons slowly ripples towards the sky and then dissipates. Even in maps where there is fog there is no lag, unlike COD2 where you throw a smoke grenade in a big map and you will receive lag.

    I often play as the British on expert, and sometimes the game is actually rather easy for me; I often win matches of 1v7. The AI is very predicable lacking the options that were in AOM such as big boomer, and early rusher. A simple strategy is to just create a big army, wait for them to attack, then demolish there city before they can regroup. In your capital one has the option to block all shipments from the enemies home cities. This in multi-player games is one of my least liked features. (I believe that this is solved though in the later expansions.) All one has to do is activate this "power" and the opponent cannot receive any shipments. This is extremely unfair because on the death match setting players can use this ability instantaneously.

    The game does have some minor bugs, and glitches which are solved in the expansions, such as asking for resources from your allies over time, but all in all it is a very solid game. Using cheats is never fair for your opponents, yet you can spawn a monster truck, or create an invincible "George Crushington". The editor is still notoriously hard to use in setting up the AI's abilities, and the map is actually circular in this game. This is a weird thing to do since walls cannot directly match up to the borders.

    I love this game and I know I will be playing it for a couple more years. I have both of the expansion packs and they add a new level to the game play. This game is NOT a waste of money, and will definetely keep an Age of Empires fan satisfied....more info
  • The Perfect Time Waster
    Age of Empires 3 is an awesome game with it's high-resolution graphics, new game-play, and deep story-line, but it IS NOT just a game. This is where spare time is meant to go. Microsoft has had some great ideas in the past, but the AoE series are honestly some of the best games I have ever played. This game will have you playing non-stop and I personally guarantee you will love every minute of it!...more info
  • A&E III
    anyone how liked A&E II will love this game It works grate on the MAC with the improved graphics are grate! ...more info
  • Terrible, worse than the last edition!
    This game is not an improvement over the previous edition. I would not recommend buying this.
    Reasons why it sucks:
    -The graphics aren't that great.
    -You can only see a small area of the playing field at once.
    -You have to build up civilizations over time, you can't take full advantage of their attributes immediately.
    -I hate the card system, it's lame.
    -You can't double-click to select all the units of one type in an area.
    -No real improvements over the last game, just different. As in crappier.
    ...more info
  • Excellent But Archers on the Plains of Abraham?
    This is an excellent strategy game. I am very interested in colonial and Eighteenth Century warfare so I enjoy the era and the animations of musket loading pioneers and soldiers. It mimics linear tactics although it is not an exact reproduction. The naval warfare is also good although you will not see ships in linear formation.

    There is a definite improvement over Age of Empires II in that there are very real differences between the cultures that require differing strategies when playing different nations. I really like how they were able to make it so that particular nations have an edge in certain periods. For example the Spaniards and the Ottomans are stronger in the colonial age while the other nations such as the British and French begin to excel in the fortress and industrial ages. There are more nation specific technologies than in the earlier version and there is no denying certain what I would call basic technologies to certain nations to create variation.

    I like buildings that will produce resources continuously such as mills and plantations, and factories, rather than relying on mines that are eventually "dried up." The shipments from the home cities is an interesting feature although "additions" to those cities seems to be little more than "decorating."

    My quibbles with the game have nothing to do with game play but more to do with historical accuracy. One of the British special units is the longbowman, also featured in the earlier AoE2. The computer will continue to produce this unit well into the industrial age of the game because it remains cheap and effective. I want to battle against redcoats, not medieval yeomen! Pikemen and halberdiers are other soldiers that will be produced "years" after the socket bayonet made this type of unit worthless in real European warfare.

    I wonder at some of their choices of colonizing nations--the Turks never colonized America--but perhaps they were already planning their later versions such as the Asian Dynasties. The Swedes might have been a better choice than the Germans; I don't think much of Frederick the Great commanding armies of swordsmen rather than musketeers (fusiliers). I also think Louis XIV would have been a better representative of France than Napoleon for the colonization of America....more info
  • Age of Empires didn't get worse; other games got better
    I think this is a really fun game. It has lots to do and some nice improvements over Age 2. The reason people don't seem to be liking this one so much is that it's nothing revolutionary. Age of Empires 2 was far better than other games in the genre, and AOE 3 isn't, but it's still a great game that's well worth the money....more info