Settlers are on sale on uplay. should I get it? why everyone hates 7?
>>5289516Settlers 1 to 4 are cool and worth your time but>uplayJust download "return to the roots"
>>5289516I bought settlers 3 for christmas and discovered I suck at it. Cant get past level 4 of the roman campaign.
>>5289606I didn't liked that they gave you control over your soldiers in 3. opinions on 7? it looks nice, I don't know why everyone hates it
>>5289516>>5289614>I don't know why everyone hates itUbisoft.
>>5289641yeah but... is the game good?
>>5289650Dunno. Can't find anything negative about it. Probably because no-one played it due to aforementioned.
>>5289516no, they're all slow and boring.
>>5289614The fighting part of the game is really underwhelming for me. Crush or be crushed and if you do crush, it will take half an hour to clean up all the opponents towers even though is obvious they lost.But Im also a beginner so the missions might get more interesting later on.
>>5289516They made SEVEN?!I only played I & II, took a look at III when it came out and didn't bother since.
>>5289695Yup. After 4(which was 3 but more cartoony) they made 2 Age of Empire clones and their final one was back to 1-4 style. Shame no one has tried the last one.
>>5289516Ubishit released special edition of Settlers due to anniversary and they - to my fucking surprise - did a stellar job. They even patched Settlers 4 and removed almost all of the issues, along with adding support of 4K monitors and other shit like that. So it's worth buying in that edition.Said that, Settlers 1-4 are the only ones worth playing, 5 is a joke that you should entirely ignore and 6-7 are just utterly different game sharing only title.>>5289661t. rusher>>5289695They made 4. Then they did some unrelated bullshit game that pretended to be Settlers 5. Then they did kid-friendly (as in - really kid friendly) building game with 6 and 7.So it's more like they did 4 games in the original formula, then just kept shitting out unrelated strategy games under the same title.
>>5289661>Time-management transport sim about constructing a settlement is slowWho would expect!
>>5289731>Then they did kid-friendly (as in - really kid friendly)desu 1-4 games are kid friendly too.
>>5289516I got Settlers 2 for free in some offer a while back and played it, to remember my youth. Used to be a favourite game of me and my brother when we were wee lads.The game seems so easy, now. I'm fine with nice, comfy games but there needs to be something to do. You can't build up a complex settlement for maximum comfy, and there's no real challenges to deal with that require aggressive expansion.
>>52897961-4 are kid friendly in sense of low-violence, comfy games.6-7 are made for kids age 4-9, with everything this entails.
>>5289805>and there's no real challenges to deal with that require aggressive expansion.7 fixed that. 1-4 can be top comfy nostalgia but 7 is best mechanically
>>5289516Yes. They make all the games work with modern hardware and software without any issues or extra problems, along with adding some very needed features in older ones and fixing tons of bugs. Uplay is the worst part of the deal, but they even delivered with their promise additional fix for IV's multiplayer (you are reading this correctly - Ubisoft promised something after game release and delivered)
>>5289876>7>best>mechanicallySettlers 2, 3, 4 and 10th anniversary would like to have a talk with you, each for separate reasons.7 is best of the "modern" ones, that's all. And it's anything, but good mechanically, unless you want to play a game where everything is pre-designed and pre-placed.
>>5289881But did they fix the annoying "stop construction" bug from 4? Where you stopped construction and instantly your diggers dropped their job, rather than finishing digging the foundation?
>>5289760You get slow and you get Settlers and you get Knights and Merchants.
>>5292356>What if we made Settlers, but boring and uglyFtfy
>>5289731I like 5.
>>5294193why you're lying on the internet?
>>5294193>t. someone who never even played 5