Ascendancy
Description official descriptions
Ascendancy is similar to, but nevertheless very different from, Master of Orion. You play one of many races, each with a special ability and special character traits, who set off to explore space, erect colonies (which can each have individual purposes, depending on their raw materials) and engage in battles when you clash with others who have the same goals. Weapons on the ships use power, which has to be supplied somehow.
This game introduces many original concepts, such as the Research Tree - a special scientific display in which discoveries are depicted as icons connected by lines to the "parent" technological breakthroughs and "child" ones, similar to the technology advances in Civilization, but presented in a much more visual way.
Groups +
Screenshots
Promos
Credits (DOS version)
31 People (23 developers, 8 thanks) · View all
Created by | |
Made possible through the efforts of | |
Additional support and content provided by | |
Packaging and Manual Art Direction and Design by | |
Packaging Illustration | |
Manual Digital Enhancement | |
AIL and VFX libraries by | |
Special Thanks to the Brøderbund Team | |
AIL and VFX libraries by |
|
Design & Artwork Coordinator | |
Design |
|
Photography | |
Package Design Art Direction | |
[ full credits ] |
Reviews
Critics
Average score: 78% (based on 15 ratings)
Players
Average score: 3.9 out of 5 (based on 71 ratings with 14 reviews)
The Good
This game does take a little effort (but not too much) to get into but, boy, does it pay off! The graphics are still very crisp and attractive and even rival that of certain brand new strategy games - for a 13 year old game, that's not bad at all!
But there's also the incredibly orchestric music which remains so recognisable and easily trumps the pseudo-modern beat music you find in far too many new games.
The game itself is highly addictive, with the search for new suitable planets while expanding your army being a constant drive to expand. The strategy side isn't too complex yet it's surprisingly deep.
The combat is lots of fun too with the explosions still feeling really sweet. Blowing up alien ships has to be one of the most fun elements of Ascendancy.
The Bad
Well, I have to agree with the biggest criticisms that the game has received in the past.
First of all, the AI isn't that great. There has been a patch that improves it but the original unpatched game saw the AI really badly manage planets. Every planet you captured, you had to completely rebuild from scratch. The AI never posed a real challenge.
The second problem with the game is that some might find the macromanagement tedious after you've captured 50 planets. Maintaining such a large amount of planets means a lot of work and nearly every day you have to create several buildings, start constructing a new ship, etc. My advice is: stick to smaller universes with fewer aliens to compete with. The moment you tackle a large universe, you're doomed to give up out of boredom.
The Bottom Line
This really is a different take on Master of Orion. The difference is that you have much better control over combat and have to maintain planets on a much smaller level. You constantly have to research more, upgrade buildings, build better ships, explore new solar systems, colonize new planets.
This game can really suck you in. 13 years old yet when I played it recently in Dosbox, I couldn't tear myself away from the screen until I had vanquished my opponents! My entire day went up in smoke, something which for me, few modern games are capable of achieving.
DOS · by Icarus Lytton (19) · 2008
The Good
There is much to like about Ascendency. Although it is a relatively deep space 4x strategy game, it does not take itself too seriously. The aliens are clever, with interesting drawings for their portraits and creative ship designs. The planet graphics are as well pleasing to the eye, although they don't hold up well to today's textures in games. The music is a joy to listen to, wonderfully put together.
Above all else, Ascendency is just plain fun to play. It is easy to get the hang of, and yet difficult to master (with a patch that updates the AI above the intelligence of a rock). The sheer numbers of technologies to play with throughout the game will keep you busy for hours. How can you hate game that lets you enlarge the sun in a solar system and thus slingshotting your enemies ship way out into deep space? Its one of the those games that makes you say "just one more turn". The interface is so intuitive that you'll find yourself flying back and forth between menus with easy, making the time just fly by. Creating fleets and moving them around the universe is simple, as is colonizing and attacking. Battles are fought in the same game system and interface as the rest of the game, so there is no second learning curce. Sound effects are pretty standard, some of the weapons sounds are pretty cool though.
The Bad
I gues there are a few things wrong with Ascendency, but its hard to hold them against it. For one, there is really no difference between aliens besides one special power unique to each race. All technology and buildings look the same. Now you may think this is a terrible flaw, but it really isn't. Each special power comes in handy often, and every game plays out differently. There is little in the way of ship modification. You select a size, then fill it with stuff, then its off, not much to it. As I mentioned earlier, you need to download the "Antagonizer Patch" for the game to update the AI. It shipped with dumb as nails AI, but this patch fixes that up quite nicely.
The Bottom Line
Ascendency is a game that should not be missed by an strategy lover. Some are put off by the lack of diversity between races, but those people are missing out on quite a gem. The game was never made to offer completely different play styles with every race, it was made to offer a completely different gameplay experience, while keeping the basics the same. So find the game, buy it, and lose yourself in the universe that is Ascendency
DOS · by MojoHelperMonkey (39) · 2005
Both better and worse than MOO
The Good
The three dimensions were great. The nature of both the galactic map and the system display were great, and a definite plus over the flat universe of MOO. In addition, Ascendancy systems had the realism of containing multiple planets, although I found that the nature of these planets did not depend on the star type.
The races were, for the most part, quite novel, and my only complaint is that we humans didn't show up.
Weapon balance was, for the most part, very good. Although late-technology weapons were far better than earlier ones (and so they should be!), new advances did not necessarily make older ones obsolete. Nothing, for instance, ever exceeded the range of the plasmatron, a weapon you can get your hands on while still pretty early in the game.
The variety of technologies was, although not spectacular, decent. In contrast to MOO, which mostly offered improvements on a small set of technologies, Ascendancy research provides whole new tools and abilities. I don't think that I have seen any game with as many planetwide projects possible; there were I believe three or four completely different types.
One of the nicest bits was that most aspects of the game were not statistic-based. Battles and advances were decided not on the basis of rolling dies, but depended almost entirely on your actions (of course, there are exceptions; the technology you get from ruins is completely random, and planets are mostly evaluated based on their Three Statistics).
The Bad
The same thing nobody else liked about the game: the computer opponents.
It's a pity that the same effort which went into the rest of the game could not go into the computer code; the algorithms were far too simple, almost as if they had been quickly added to the rest of the game. Diplomatic reactions were far too simple as compared, say, to MOO, and a noticeable bug is that your allies never seem to expect you to honor your alliances.
Combat code, the other foundation of the game, was equally shaky. The enemy ships were clearly following a certain specific set of checks, which I could probably copy out here to high accuracy if it were not against the rules to give out cheats (and knowing how the computer will react to anything is, essentially, the ultimate cheat). Let's just say that I found any number of tricks which pretty much ensured military superiority, even when the enemy had the superior force. One remark I will make is that the game code is very offense-oriented; unlike in MOO where sometimes the other player will seem to "see" what you are trying to do and take evasive action. I have yet to see an Ascendancy ship retreat.
What else? Well, there are a few obvious bugs elsewhere (e.g., in the building code); it seems that they spent almost no time debugging. A tight deadline, perhaps? Another complaint is the complete randomization of the xenoarchaeological code; a race can get a valuable technology (say, large-scale construction or lush growth bombs) early in the game and have a decided advantage over the others.
The Bottom Line
Excellent game at first, and very replayable, but expect to master it quickly.
DOS · by somebody (6) · 2001
Discussion
Subject | By | Date |
---|---|---|
Colonization | vedder (71351) | Feb 21, 2009 |
Trivia
PC Gamer controversy
A minor scandal surrounded the PC Gamer review of Ascendancy. PC Gamer gave the game high marks, and made it an Editor's Choice game. However, the individual who reviewed the game for PC Gamer also turned out to be the author of the game's Strategy Guide, leading many to wonder if the review had been padded in order to boost sales of the Strategy Guide.
In Computer Gaming World #151 (February 1997), a letter by William Trotter was published in which he shared his view on the matter. Summarized, he needed money to pay off repairs on his house and therefore gladly agreed to write the strategy guide. However, the developers failed to give him any information on the game, not even technology trees, and a one-month deadline. So he had no other choice but to play the game non-stop for two weeks, becoming eventually obsessed with it. So when PC Gamer hired him for the review, he really thought Ascendancy was a great game, and he failed to see the conflict of interest. In hindsight, he agrees with the bad review in Computer Gaming World (see MobyRanks), the strategy guide turned out to be pathetic and he didn't receive any royalties from it at all.
Awards
- CODiE Awards
- 1996 - Best Strategy Software
Information also contributed by Afterburner
Analytics
Upgrade to MobyPro to view research rankings and price history! (when applicable)
Related Sites +
-
Ascendancy
official game page at Logic Factory's website, archived copy from 1997 by the Wayback Machine
Identifiers +
Contribute
Are you familiar with this game? Help document and preserve this entry in video game history! If your contribution is approved, you will earn points and be credited as a contributor.
Contributors to this Entry
Game added by Tomer Gabel.
iPhone, iPad added by Techademus.
Additional contributors: Rebound Boy, formercontrib, Patrick Bregger, MrFlibble.
Game added August 29, 1999. Last modified September 15, 2024.