PC User Reviews

World: So so pretty. Gameplay/Voice&Video/Mechanics/Basic English Writing: So so pretty ....****. Was this outsourced?! Not even grammatically correct text?! So disappointed but then again it's Ubisoft.

I got really happy over the trailer, gave in to the nostalgia "The Setllers is comming back with a fresh coat of paint and modernized" but nope, I ended up getting mobile game material. Here's a suggestion: make it free to play with microtransactions and you're golden. We scratch the itch of playing "The Settlers", playing a simple game and you might even earn some money on the side with the cosmetics.

First the positive thing(s): The graphics are amazing. I really like the islands and the tropical vibe the story takes place in. But this doesn't make up for the horrible gameplay. The setting up of a settlement is, compared to the other settler games, a repetitive dismaying task. The claiming of new land is repetitive and really time consuming. The attacks is not worthy of being called RTS-like. You have no influence howsoever how a group of units attack, neither it lets you select a certain unit screenwide. I'm back to my old settler games for now. I bought it cheap in a sale, but even those 12 euro's were a waste of money.

It´s a good game, because the graphics are great and other issues are not so extreme

I have buy it! and this game give me the feeling from Settlers 3 and 4 for me is fun it look good and its a real Settler. for me a 10/10

I've played all of the settlers universe and this one is also as enjoyable as 1,2,3,4 edition

The game has beautiful graphics. Gameplay is actually very fun and a good mix between economy and combat. It could have a bit deeper economy, but it is still complex enough to allow forging different strategies. Also the latest updates went in a good direction (new buildings: berry press which produces potions and charcoal maker which produces coal and the forester was reworked from "garden-style" to free-planting). An they even added a new map which allows a settler limit of 1000 settlers instead of the normal 500. In general this game excels in multiplayer. A match can take between 30 minutes and multiple hours depending on the number of players and play style. The campaign is also playable but quite boring. I would not recommend to pay 60€ for the game but sometimes there are huge discounts and 20-30€ is really ok in my opinion. There is an ingame shop but its literally irrelevant and the items repeat very often and without any problems you can buy them using the earned currency from playing the games. Unfortunately sometimes there are some technical problems/bugs, for example I spend 2,5 hours in a multiplayer match and did not receive any rewards for the victory which can be extremely frustrating. My wishes for future changes/features: - building pallisades - mines require food - mines should not be infinite or always have 100% efficency - big open wheat fields instead of the farm-internal "garden-style" 2 hexagon wheat field - Provide proper AI which is able to fill empty player slots and which is not just bad - Add ingame chat / quick chat -Add controllable ships which can be used to travel to other islands - More differences between factions in general (including different music styles like in Settlers 3/4) - Upgradable units with gold or gems (golden armor instead of silver armor) - Decorative buildings As you can see my list of feature requests is long and I see a lot of potential in this game. Unfortunately the development is very slow and the worst part is the communication to the community. So game itself is 8/10. Communication is -1/10.

I have played the game for 12 hours now and i realy like the game. Graphics is great it fits how a settlers game should look like. Buiding is fun. updates are great they take the time to lisen and fix the problems.

Ich bin ebenfalls, wie viele, Siedler Fan der ersten Stunde. Ich habe mir das Spiel, trotz der vielen negativen Kritiken, die das Spiel einstecken musste, gekauft. Ich war sehr überrascht, wie positiv es ist, wie toll es aussieht,wie wuselig es ist. Ja, mir sind alle negativen Kretikpunkte bekannt, aber für mich treffen viele nicht zu. Das Spiel macht super viel Spaß :-). Es ist entschlackt worden, ja. Aber ist unbedingt schlimm? Ich finde nicht. Es ist endlich mal ein Spiel, das ich nicht studiert haben muss, es hat eine Story, es wuselt überall. Ein wenig mehr Statistiken hätten es sein können. Aber trotz allem bin ich sehr positiv überrascht. Super, Ubi. Und DIESE TOLLE GRAFIK. Überall wuselt es, jeder hat was zu tun.Sooo detailliert und so liebevoll gemacht. Ich gebe beide Daumen nach oben!

Well, I was avoiding the game because of bad reviews.. and what a surprise. I need to say I played ALL settlers games, started with number one... . This last one, new allies, surprised me with really beautiful graphics, its all there, the charm... I see, there is not so huge chains productions, but hell its chill and charming, love creating my settlements. Details and animations are best I ever saw, really very cool, as well as sounds. I somehow am fine with a little simpler chains, as it does not feel overhelming. I did not tought I will enjoy this game, but boy I am surprised how well it plays and how it looks. I am having fun. Give it a try and ignore bad reviews, judge by yourself. It is definately not that bad and is abig surprise I am enjoying it.

This game is what happens when you try to copy paste AOE4. A game that was already 2/10, you lose the last 2 points for somehow being even worse than 4 is. Why would you copy a game whose overwhelmingly negative in reception to begin with? What an insult. At least in settlers 7 you could enjoy yourself still. But here lol, no chance.

It really shows that the Dev Team switched the title from a original Settlers game to a sh#tty RTS in the middle of the development. It`s utter garbage and should not exist. Another franchise ruined by ubisofts braindead execs.

I've been playing within the Settlers world since The Settlers in the 90's and was waiting impatiently for a new Settlers after Settlers 7. New Allies is a slightly different take, but there have been several different takes over the years.. some have worked better than others so to say it doesn't fit in with the "Settlers" family is disingenuous because the Settlers family is varied. I have to admit that there is work that needs to be done, but that has been the case for several iterations but the foundations they have built are beautiful and have massive potential! The developers are actively working on new content and improving the existing gameplay/content but it is still imminently playable if you want something a bit more economy based than Age of Empires, this is the game for you!

Horrible game no matter if you played the ones before! I did play all the settlers and used to love Ubisoft but as of now, I do not understand how Ubisoft still exist.

This is full game and early access content. Game is no completed. AI no exists.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The Slog: New Boredom Combat: The Settlers is an overly easy RTS. This game literally requires zero thought in combat. It is pretty simple. Do you have more units than the enemy? Then you win. Amassing an army that can conquer the map is effortless. Gathering: Get used to the same buildings and roads over, and over, and over...Nothing upgrades, nothing can be made more powerful aside from assigning an extra resource to it. Everything is cheap to make, nothing takes effort. The Story: Is a joke. Who is writing these games for Ubisoft? Fire them. "Hey there, just us oppressed Settlers,, the good guys cause we said so. Now lets go to a new island, amass an army, and slaughter every living person on it. Poor us." Just laughable. Overall: It's another identity-less, watered down, Ubisoft product. Bad design. Contrivances that take the place of difficulty spikes. Boring attempt at and underdog story. Just bad at every level, especially a few hours in when you realize, this is it. This is all you are getting for the rest of the game. No Thanks.

Let me explain the higher than average score please - the game itself is entertaing, it is a nice combination of the Settlers roots with a modern faster paced approach. It recieves bad ratings because the veteran playerbase wanted deep economy, single player oriented game, which it is not as much as they’ve wanted. The issues with crashes that the game has are bot helping the score as well, although quite a few has already been patched. Now to the positive side - the potential of the game is huge with it’s cross platform release and crossplay enabled. It looks great and please great as well when it works as it should, which it does most of the time by now. If the dev team keeps working on the game, I believe it should be given a chance.

An insult to the original creator, an insult to the community and the fans, an insult to the legacy. Leaving behind a product, made for profit only, without a soul, several itterations and changes, complete overhauls. Promising features with the announcement, that are now dearly missed. All that is left is a shallow and tasteless puddle of mediocrity not even a thirsty stray cat wants to gulp from. Feel ashamed. For you are nothing more but a peripheral shadow in the sight of the devotee, whose eyes are searching tirelessly in hope for a passionate piece of art that he can immerse himself into. This here? Will never be that.

Thank you for killing another franchise Ubisoft. Can’t wait to see what will be your next victim… I mean “project”.

It's just another diarrhea from Ubisoft. We all should know what to expect when they're involved.

This could have been a good game, but unfortunately it feels like a game where different developers wanted to take it in different directions and they fought, but nobody won, so it ended up a mish mash of half baked features. The campaign is a snoozefest, soldiers have like 3000 ms built in lag before responding to any command, it's full of bugs, save game stops working, multiplayer is broken and desyncs, crashes, basically the multiplayer is unplayable. The only good part of the game is Hardcore Mode, where you can play skirmish maps with modifiers which rotate weekly, with allies in co-op. Unfortunately, the game doesn't auto matchmake you with an ally for these challenges. No big deal, you can ask around in the game's discord, right? Well, no. The game doesn't have a discord. You have to browse the forums and find some unofficial fan discords. Overall, nobody seems to care about this game. Ubisoft barely promoted it, the developers are pretty much absent, it's missing basic features, and is broken in many ways. It doesn't feel like Ubisoft expects you to buy this game, it feels like they expect you to pay a month of Ubi+ subscription, try it, realize it's bad and then uninstall it. Just casual mitigation of the financial losses that they had when it became clear that the development wasn't going anywhere. I hope they at least fix the multiplayer connectivity problems before they drop it like a hot potato, which is clearly what they want to do as soon as possible, so the few players that actually like it can at least play it sometimes.

Happens when you think all the nice elements of old settlers is to complicate for mass market and make everything more simple and not-settle-like.

And again, an AAA-publisher takes his chance to burry a 30-year old franchise. This could easily be the worst game of the year. No need for details, they have been discussed for month now, but a few notes: 1. This is NOT a Settlers Game. 2. This is a BAD and BORING RTS, why play this crap, if there are so many good RTS Games with various settings waiting ouit there for us? 3. It's technically a DISASTER. How could this get relased? HOW? 4. Ingame shop is working, actually one thing is working kappa. 5. The Campain is boring, bad and a waste of time. 6. The AI is so bad, actually AI's should be offended by calling this thing AI. 7. Dont buy this, burn your money or eat it instead of investing it in this game. 8. Bye

The have offers an interesting blend between the Settlers and more classical RTS, combining full combat unit control with complex production chains and interesting research tree. The game does still lack some depth and features of the modern strategy games, but I believe it's one or two major updates away from success, but maybe it should have not been a Settlers game but rather a standalone product.

Settlers are no ideal, but not bad at all like many wrote. Yea, it had some 'raws' and rude angles but it's all can be polish and fixed. Many negative is go from "Store" in game... but it all visual. If you don't like new skins - don't buy it. It addon to the game visual and not are mechanic or gameplay of game. I hope Ubi will not drop this and will patch and full game. Now it's '6' for new breath and experiments.

Après avoir joué une dizaine d heure de jeu Le jeu est graphiquement magnifique super boulot Après ce n est plus un settlers ça ressemble plus à un âge of empire et à un northgard sans l hiver à survivre. Après seulement 3 factions Connaissant Ubisoft beaucoup de mise à jour vont être déployer pour peaufiner leur jeu avec du contenu additionnel qui va sûrement améliorer tout ça jeu acheté day one à 39e et je ne regrette pas le multijoueurs pas assez stable pour l instant

The Settlers: New Allies is refreshingly reminiscent of Settlers 3. Some things have been dumbed down a bit and there is lots of room for improvement but overall it captures the same feel of the classics. There are lots of critics claiming that this game "doesn't know what it is" but I strongly disagree here. My biggest disappointments, however, is the lack of a free-for-all mode or the option to play with AI teammates. It is also a huge let down that there is no editor or map generator.

very disappointing game... I was baited by the name but it's totally different than I expected. I loved to play settler 1-4 and I still love to play anno 1800 but this game is more like a early access indie game than a building economy game with a little military action. It's more a bad military action game with a bit of building and economy... I don't understand why they changed the core gameplay mechanics of this franchise...

The game does not work, like you cant find anyone to play vs. and when you get a game after 1 hour you desync 20 mins into the game, and **** there is no CHAT so you cant even talk to people. i dont know how the game is because it does not even work

The game does not deserve the name The Settlers. It gets boring very quickly and has no depth. It is not a real Settlers game and not a real RTS like Age of Empires. Only 1 point because of the pretty graphics. After Volker Wertich rightly left the project, the game was doomed. Because then the wrong decisions were made by people who don't understand The Settlers. They try to get the maximum profit out of it. Keep the game simple, ingame shop with real money and console versions. A console version is basically not wrong, but only if the game does not lose depth in development for it. Pioneers of Pagonia will enter early access on Steam at the end of 2023. The new building strategy game by Volker Wertich, the father of The Settlers. Wait for this game, it's worth it! If you can't wait, play The Settlers 7 History Edition or Settlers 3 & 4 with the settlers-united fan patches: multiplayer lag fixes, better AI, new maps, real new HD graphics and more. But please, don't by this game.

I bought subscription because of it and spent 2 hours on it and in my opinion it's wasted money. - Game crashed on first run. - Real visuals of game (not PR materials) looks terrible, it looks worse than 13 years older Settlers 7. - It doesn't have surround audio - Whole game looks "cheap" and unfinished (UI is absolutely terrible) - I am not aware of any way to restart campaign (I skipped intro videos as I was just testing graphics details at first and no way to watch it now...) - No changes of speed in a game (you can buy Booster packs for real money) - Seems like realtime strategy rather than Settlers: - You need to have resources in advance to be able to build building. - Warehouses must be in close proximity of gathering places. - Direct management army and building units (engineers) To some extend I liked it, but not enough to spend more time on it as it felt I am playing beta version of product which is just trying to get as much money from people for as low amount of effort as possible.

I'm big fan of Settlers but If you wanna spend money on Settlers game go and buy Settlers 2,3 and 4. Dont waste your money on this garbage with mix of all known great strategy games. AI are bad as it can be mostly beacuse of routes and storage places - settlers always grab items near of them and not near from production building or storage - example - i had stone miner builded i build gold mine with 1 space from that stone mine and my settlers grab stones on gold mine from the furthest storage place. next thing is in-game cash, why we should spend any money on sorry for that word stupid visuals in our beloved Settlers game ? This thing should not be in game at all. Mostly disappointing is campaign we waited so many years for just 12 missions? That is really sad. In last the game is at it is you cant change any settings in game (except damm skins) you can't set difficulty you canť pick your map (its's always random) you just can't do nothing just play their game and spend your money.

Didn't expect to like the game this much. I think the Settlers has been in an identity crisis since at least settler's 3, so the fact that the game is oriented differently then previous once is fine to me. As I don't like multiplayer I can't say much about that, but it has been one of the campaigns I enjoyed by far the most in recent years. The difficulty is sadly not selectable and increases only really in the last 3 levels. I do have to say I really enjoy the mix between RTS and the economy based game. It is brilliant for a relaxed evening. I think the focus for the game is more with casuals, which most likely is the origin of the hate against it.

Wants to be a lot of things and ends up being nothing at all. Graphics are beautiful, but the price for that seems to be that the game keeps crashing. Also has a lot of other critical bugs.

Meh, zu wenig Siedler und die ganze produktionsketten sind ein Witz, und oft nur optional. Für ein RTS zu langsame Mechaniken und zu wenig verschiedene Einheiten und für ein Siedler zu wenig Siedler.

Good game. good graphics. maybe I'm lucky but the game doesn't crash or anything like that for me. typical settler mechanics. The only bug I have is that the game won't close from time to time. then i have to end this via the task manager. the game was still saved. I haven't played the beta, so I can't rate the difference.

What a shame. I am and was a big fan of the settlers. I started as a child and really love it. And now? Is is definitly not an RTS, the RTS part is very weak an unbalanced. And sadly it is not an building simulation ever. It is only bad, and buggy just really sad so see what happened to this series..

The Game wants to be a fast and dynamic RTS but fails because the economy part takes too long and is too slow for that type of game design. But for base build game it is too shallow. Food totally optional and you end up buildung houses all the time and one production chain for millitary. Also place the overpowered towers and you are done. Thats not what settlers about. It would be an enjoyable game if they would at more economy elemets and more variaty in millitary units. But in the current state this is an abomination to what settlers once stood for.

They should have just called it "Age of Settlers," because that's all it is. Redesigned from the ground up, huh? More like, copied the most basic RTS design and used the Settlers brand to sell it. I have a feeling this game will be record-breaking. That is, record-breaking number of REFUNDS because of the false advertising. What a joke! It also makes me really wonder about so called "professional" reviews. Are these people being PAID to rate games well, or are they just oblivious to the franchise in general? It makes me wonder if they're even gamers at all. It makes me wonder if they even PLAYED THE GAME!? One point for graphics. That's it.

Kein echtes Siedler Story gegen Anfang ok, dann langweilig PVP mit sehr großem Spaßpotenzial Nach heutigem Patch noch keine weiteren Probleme Bei anderen aber durchaus Warenketten zu einfach Man nimmt was man bekommt, im Moment keine 60€ wert, wenn alle Fehler rausgpatcht sind maybe 40€ maximal Hardcore kann mit Freuden Spaß machen Story 5/10 Multiplayer 9¾/10 (im jetzigen Technischen Zustand 7/10, je nach funktionsfähigkeit) Hardcore 7/10 Das Spiel und die Reihe hat besseres verdient, Ubisoft (vor allem die Führungsetage hat da großen Mist gebaut) Da ich den Multiplayer so sehr mag 8/10, sind wäre es maximal 6/10, wenn nicht 4 oder 5...

After 10 h, I am confident to say that it is a bad game. Bad in terms of not being fun to play. It is not a Settlers game, obviously, but a few points are: - It is 5/10 because I appreciate the experiment. I do not think that Ubisoft, with all its mismanagement and release fails of the past years, can handle innovation at this point. - Did you know that some Christian Hagedorn is the game's director, but apparently, the game designer behind Champions of Anteria from 2016 which originally also started as a Settlers game. We can take bets if Hagedorn's ego is mainly responsible for both game failures. - Ubisoft's desire to create a new PvP game type probably led to that LoL female announcer voice, which feels not only odd but, if you know Dota 2 or LoL, is just awkward and bad. - There is not much left of the chilling colony/settlement building game mechanics. If you need a base/colony builder, play Foundation or Farthest Frontier, to name a few. - We could go into detail regarding the horrible AI wave attacks, the surprisingly ugly UI, or how a baker is still baking without water, in terms of supply chains. But I think that these points are to be expected, if the original Settlers formula does not play a role anymore. - The campaign is awful and unimaginative. I didn't finish it, but do all scenes play in the same room, between the same 3 characters? The factions... I recall the early demo where they were different. Lore and factions do not matter at this point. - The influence of MOBAs and some competitive RTS is there, but Hagedorn, the design team, or whoever is or was in charge, clearly does not understand those genres. Settlers New Allies would probably be better off as an experimental game as its own new IP, I guess, like Champions of Anteria. - Let's hope that Hagedorn or Ubisoft do not try to create a SimCity MOBA game next. It is all about a lack of creativity and experience at game design, I guess, and how Ubisoft does not know on how to handle and check bad game designs internally. Because the art, the lighting, and I am pretty sure also the programming, if it was not been rushed, is rather solid. - It is perhaps worth mentioning that all Ubisoft Settlers games, since Settlers 5 (and we could argue about Settlers 7), have the reputation of being mediocre and a joke commercially. Ubisoft should sell this IP. Therefore, Settlers New Allies most likely mirrors the internal director and management problems that have plagued Ubisoft for years. It is beyond me why the Ubisoft management left the franchise to someone like Hagedorn who objectively failed before at the same franchise with the drama surrounding Champions of Anteria. The drama of the past months alone is worth an article. It is not only unprofessional. Ubisoft seems to be in some kind of internal crisis.

hello, first the game isnt 60 euro **** big price is a shame, i understand after the long time , they need much money to come in green zone by money, but this game is maybe 30 euro worth only.... multiplayer dosent work to many disconnects and crashes, multiplayer are to slow for RTS and the game have not enough economy machanics for a economy simulation **** game whant to be between the settlers 2 and 4 but its a big **** you like economy management, with a loittle bit fighting play settlers 2 if you like more RTS games play settlers **** settlers new allies, is the badest settlers every time in my **** the game drops in a sale to 20-30 euros maybe its okay to buy but you become a very slow game and there are other settler titles, where much better as this new one. dont buy it! its the money not worth!

Now I get why they didn't really market this game and didn't want reviews on release...game is dumbed down joke..there are mobile games more complex than this. Crazy that same company did Anno 1800, which is great (even though it costs like 200E with all the DLCs). 2 points for the nice visuals. Games these days are just garbage, especially AAA.

This is not "The Settlers". It looks like a Tower Defense game. Luckily I was able to request a refund on time. I don't recommend it at all.

Doesn't deserve the name "The Settlers". If you wanna play a good Settlers stick to the first four games. The Alpha had such good ideas. It is unbelievable how they massacred the game. There are 6 buildings that are necessary to play the game the other buildings are pointless. The AI is barely functional. It would have been better they never released this abomination upon us.

Kein Siedler.... irgend eine Mischung aus mehreren Spielen aus diesem Genre . Aber leider zu 90% nicht die positiven. Wieso nennt man das Siedler ... keine Ahnung. Wahrscheinlich eine Schande für jeden Siedler Fan... Das Spiel ist für mich höchstens 10€ Wert und dafür muss pvp auch erstmal richtig funktionieren...

In 2019 there was a great alpha version of the game (not perfect but it had so much potention) but after two years of silence they presented us the Beta: ripped almost everything out to make it console friendly I guess. They dumbed everything down and made it a weak RTS game. The current game has little to do with The Settlers anymore. There are almost no production chains left and most of them are optional now. For me it's a fancy looking tower defense / RTS game. They ripped it's heart out. P.s The trailer here is from the old and better (2019) version of the game and is misleading.

To carry the name of The Settlers and provide gameplay this shallow is incredibly saddening. They removed the requirement of food for your people. Shortened production lines. Made military recruitment and combat single unit based instead of squads. Finally removed any social aspect from your population. They tried very hard to be the next Action RTS with an IP that was never intended to be such. They get points for the visuals, it looks pretty. But after about an hour you'll realize looks are all it has going for it. Ultimately with constant crashes, lackluster gameplay, server side connection issues and day one MTX. its not worth your time. Instead you'll get an itch to go play Anno 1800, which at this point, does Settlers better than Settlers.

As a long time Settlers fan who started with Settlers II in 1996 I can't even find the right words for my disappointment with this latest entry in the series. After the rocky beta and a lot of player feedback I was expecting that they would put that feedback to good use and listen to the fans. But after they announced that they would not send out review copies, I got worries. If a publisher does not want outlets to test and report on their game before it launches, it's pretty clear what's going on. Being a huge fan, I still bought it and hoped for the best. Unfortunately, the game falls short in every aspect. Where older titles had complex wares that needed to be manufacturer, managed and distributed, this game has a very simplistic way of handling resources. When it comes to the Settlers games, this is the most barebone of resource management. There is barely any challenge involved with it. The features of the game are extremely lackluster and makes me wonder where all the development time went. Only 13 missions, no map generator, no map editor, the already mentioned most basic resource system and a weird combat system that does not really fit the series are some of the game's shortcomings. In addition to that, the game has severe technical issues and that might be one of the strongest reasons why they didn't want anyone to see how the "finished" game plays before launch. The game crashes very often and due to the terrible auto save feature I constantly lose a lot of progress. The graphics are disappointing, too. It looks like a game that might have come out a few years ago. I don't understand why they did not use a more modern engine. Although I must admit I have no problem with the graphical style itself. It's cute. All in all it's a 1/10 for me as a settlers fan. It might be fun for others, but to me it looks like a cheap use of the settlers IP for a quick cash crab. Although it is very disappointing that the game shows how little heart and care they put into their product and how little they cared about a game that is at least playable from a technical point of view.