I had the opportunity to try in the last period Empires Apart, the new RTS of the very Italian studio DESTINYBit and I must say that I am very hard fought in writing this article.
Who chews the genre well, can not fail to compare Empires Apart to the much more famous Age of Empires, but is it a fault to try to "imitate" the best on the square?
On the other hand, the RTS do not shine for originality: gather resources, prepare their base, build unity and go to conquer the opposing base, represent the fundamentals of most of them.
In Empires Apart it is possible to manage the growth of one's own civilization on two distinct branches, economic and military, and to explore these branches allows us to access new units, buildings and technologies.
The maps are randomly constructed and at the beginning of the game we also have the possibility to decide which hero to use. The choice falls on two types: the hero "Warrior"Which obviously provides a big boost to the fight, or the"Ruler"Which helps us in the expansion and construction of our civilization, but provides little support on the battlefield.
Great merit of the boys of DESTINYbit is to have created different civilizations that allow you to set the game differently from each other. All units in one faction are unique, allowing players to choose the civilization that best suits their style of play.
If you want, for example, to dedicate yourself to a very aggressive game the choice may fall on the Aztecs, or if you want to try something really special you can play with the Mongols who have the peculiarity of being able to "dismantle" all their buildings and turn them into special units , then rebuild them where it suits them best.
While on the one hand, all this variety is certainly a point in favor of Empires Apart, on the other we must always consider the balance factor and, given the nature of the title clearly intended for multiplayer, is not a factor to be overlooked.
The game modes are varied, but most of it is dedicated to multiplayer, although it is necessary to point out the challenges created for each civilization (6 for each) which represent perhaps the best of what the single player has to offer, even if one of the the most interesting and fun modes to play is the "Survival": The player must collect resources and prepare the defenses during the day and resist hordes of enemies during the night.
In addition to not having a "campaign" mode, what does not work in Single Player mode is the artificial intelligence of our enemies (and sometimes even our units) that undermines the enjoyment of the game, in case you do not want to throw in "Very bad" world of ranked or skirmish online.
And it is precisely on this point that my inner conflict arises: if on the one hand Empires Apart represents a good product for multiplayer, the almost complete absence of a real single player mode is a big problem, at least for my personal taste.
From a technical point of view the choice of DESTINYbit It is very precise: use an essential but functional graphic to allow as many players as possible to run smoothly Empires Apart on their systems, and I think the choice should be rewarded. The game does not show problems even on a system dated like the one on which I tried both in window mode and full screen.
In conclusion I can say that if you love RTS and have a highly developed competitive spirit, Empires Apart can give you many satisfactions, even if over time I believe that there will be interventions on the balance between usable civilizations.
If you are lovers of Single Player mode in this genre, I'm sorry to absolutely advise against this title.