Settlers game spreads ugly messages

Settlers: The Rise of an Empire
2007
Ubisoft

"Settlers" caught our eye as a strategy videogame, but it is a disappointing game, with little originality. Other games involving economic and military strategy have greater depth and real-world significance.

Technically we did not find any difficulties with the game other than late game slowness running on a system only somewhat above the minimum required. It is hard to see what the problem was because the number of units involved nowhere approaches those in similar strategy games.

In addition to the resource-gathering other games have, "Settlers" has major industries for cleanliness and decoration. That would be the extent of the game's innovation.

There is no historical or economic logic to the game. As the player trades more items, the price per item goes down. That's about it.

The title the player wins for her knight is meaningless.

It's not the most violent game. What violence there is will please anal retentives--wiping out wolves, bandits and of course other players. Bandits are modeled as pure military parasites. The successful player will accumulate some surplus, send out military forces and defeat the wolves and bandits. There is no underlying thought about how bandits and wolves arise except as a lack of control by the player.

The manual reads as follows: "You can restore honour and justice to this world. The time has come for new rulers, new challenges, and new and glorious deeds. The time has come for the rise of an empire." Since the game harks backward in time it reinforces reactionary ideologies.

In MIM's political economy, settlers play an important role, especially in the question of nationalism. The reason that settlers have been important in the united $tates, I$rael, Au$tralia etc. as well as within the exploited nations is not handled here. With all the wrong political messages, "Settlers" the game should be skipped.