There are no reviews for this game.
Our Users Say
||How smart (or dumb) you perceive the game's artificial intelligence to be
||How well the game mechanics work (player controls, game action, interface, etc.)
||The quality of the art, or the quality/speed of the drawing routines
||How much you personally like the game, regardless of other attributes
|Sound / Music
||The quality of the sound effects and/or music composition
|Overall User Score (12 votes)
MobyRanks are listed below. You can read here
for more information about MobyRank.
Overall, while the game has some problems, it's come a long way to being the game originally intended. Battlecruiser 3000 A.D. V2.0 is deep, thorough, and satisfying. If you really have the time and patience to learn it, you'd be doing yourself a favor, because it gives the chance to live that fantasy of being captain of a starship. It has conceivably every feature you'd want in a starship simulator, plus a plethora of features you'd never even thought of. If you can get over the steep learning curve and dated graphics, give Battlecruiser 3000 A.D. V2.0 a try. If you want better graphics and don't want to deal with MS-DOS, wait for the semi-sequel, Battlecruiser: Millenium, which will have all of the above features plus be Windows 95 native. In either case, the Battlecruiser games go a long way in giving us the ultimate space sims, succeeding on almost every level.
While I would like to give BattleCruiser a much higher rating, it simply doesn’t deserve it. The small percentage of players to which this title will appeal is not enough to warrant a recommendation. In fact, the difficulty this title presents due to its many bugs, overblown scope, poor instructions, lack of in-game training mode and outdated use of technology is reason enough for me to offer a warning: Approach with caution. I do acknowledge the many positives in this title, and while I surely recognize the effort and commitment to offering a complete space simulation experience, I believe BattleCruiser tries to do too much, and rather than excel at any one thing, merely offers multiple types of mediocrity.
Despite a wide array of grandiose ideas and aspirations, it is highly unlikely that you will ever think to yourself "I'm having fun" while playing the game. Total fiends of micromanagement could well find a happy home here, but details are worth little without a firm foundation in high quality, accessible gameplay to back them up. The unfortunate fact is that Battlecruiser 3000AD requires a tremendous investment of time pursuing a kind of "fun" that is obscure and elusive at best, not because of a flawed concept, but because of a miserable implementation.