Info about Five Nations:

Official game description:
  
What began as a conflict over a scientific expedition in the far future escalated into a war between five determined galactic civilizations. Five Nations is a real-time sci-fi strategy game for PC platform. Encompassing tactical combat in space in real-time mixed with micromanagement of economy, construction, and production featuring a variety of single player modes.  
*   **Story mode** - 56 various campaign missions with voice acting.  
*   **Skirmish mode** - Over 20 maps to pitting you against AI in customisable games — with adjustable difficulty settings such as starting only with a Foundation station.  
*   **Classic RTS MACRO elements** - Develop your space facilities, mining stations, factories, power plants and research centers. Mine resources in order to produce a gigantic armada of various spacecrafts.  
*   **Classic RTS MICRO elements** - Confront and destroy your rivals by employing shrewd strategies to outmaneuver their fleets by micromanaging your spaceships and structures through conventional RTS mechanics tailored to modern action-packed gameplay.  
*   **Make your own maps and mods** - Built-in map editor and various tools allow you to completely create your own ideas.

Release date: May 4, 2021

Categories: Real-time Strategy, Single-player Story, Space Combat, Base Building, Resource Management, Skirmish Mode, Map Editor, Mod Support


- Hardware Profile: No data
Feature extractions:
- Community Price:
  - Community fair range: $10.00 - $15.00
  - Reasoning: Multiple reviews highlight $10 as a great value when on sale, while $20 is considered a bit expensive. The game is not seen as worth the full price of a AAA RTS like Age of Empires II Definitive Edition (~$20), and the frequent sales to $10 suggest $10–$15 is the community-accepted fair price range for the base game.
- Playtime Metrics:
  - Game completion: 40.0h
  - Story completion: N/A
  - Session length: N/A
  - Endgame: N/A
  - Reasoning: The first evidence indicates a total playtime of over 40 hours, which likely covers a significant portion of the game's content including campaign and skirmish, suggesting a near-completion playthrough. The second evidence provides a specific session length of 47 minutes, representing a typical play session where 5 missions were completed.
- Time-to-fun:
  - Summary: The game begins with a slow, unfriendly introduction featuring poor readability and a weak story, but enjoyment increases after progressing through early human missions into alien missions where the story and variety improve.
  - Stance: Clicks after
  - Anchor: Starting alien missions
  - Time to anchor: N/A
  - Friction: slow pacing; boring introduction; difficult terrain and unit differentiation; lack of tutorial; weak story
  - Unlock drivers: alien missions; story progression; mission variety; new challenges
  - Conditions: enjoyment of oldschool RTS; tolerance for slow start; acceptance of no multiplayer
- Player Archetypes:
  - Nostalgic Campaign Enthusiast (buy)
    - Motivation: Nostalgic campaign experience and classic RTS design.
    - Playstyle: Plays through lengthy single-player campaigns and skirmish against AI, embracing retro mechanics and storytelling.
    - Experience: veteran
    - Purchase stance: buy
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: Starcraft; Command & Conquer; Supreme Commander; Halo Wars; Dawn of War
  - Bug-Aware Indie Supporter (deep sale)
    - Motivation: Supporting indie development while tolerating flaws for the old-school feel.
    - Playstyle: Cautiously plays campaigns, often encountering bugs and missing features; still enjoys core gameplay.
    - Experience: veteran
    - Purchase stance: deep sale
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: Dark Reign; Conquest Frontier Wars; Star Command; Starcraft; Command & Conquer
  - Multiplayer-Limited Frustrated Player (deep sale)
    - Motivation: Desire for multiplayer to enhance the already solid single-player foundation.
    - Playstyle: Completes campaigns while wishing for multiplayer; would engage in competitive play if available.
    - Experience: veteran
    - Purchase stance: deep sale
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: Starcraft


Below are summaries of things people say about the game per category.
Each point is assigned a weight that represents how often it is mentioned across all reviews.
What players like:
- Extensive campaign content (weight 0.67): Players highlight the campaign's length and volume, with reports of 30 to 90 missions, and describe it as massive, huge, and worth the price. The long campaign with voiced missions and cutscenes is a significant positive.
- Diverse faction design (weight 0.67): Players appreciate the variety among the five factions, noting distinct playstyles, mechanics, and visual differences. This diversity enhances replayability and strategic depth.
- Nostalgic old-school RTS feel (weight 0.62): The game successfully evokes the classic RTS era of the 90s, blending nostalgia with modern graphics and mechanics. Many reviewers mention a strong resemblance to StarCraft and appreciate the faithful old-school design.
- Enjoyable and fun RTS (weight 0.57): Reviewers consistently describe the game as fun, satisfying the RTS itch, and being a great entry in the genre. The core gameplay is praised for its solid mechanics and overall enjoyability.
- Beautiful 2D visuals (weight 0.3): The pre-rendered 2D graphics are repeatedly praised as beautiful, sleek, and refined. The art style contributes positively to the overall aesthetic experience.
- Great value for price (weight 0.26): Multiple reviewers state the game is well worth its cost, especially given the lengthy campaign and overall quality. The price-to-content ratio is considered excellent.
- Overall good game quality (weight 0.2): Reviewers describe the game as good in all the right ways, with solid mechanics and enjoyable gameplay. It is considered a standout RTS title in recent times.
- High-quality soundtrack (weight 0.18): The music is praised for being well-done and fitting the game's atmosphere, with specific mention of Sylon's theme. The soundtrack enhances immersion.
- Accessible yet deep gameplay (weight 0.11): The gameplay is described as easy to pick up but with depth for mastering systems, appealing to both newcomers and veterans. This balance is a key strength.
- Carrier-based fighter mechanics (weight 0.1): Players enjoy the feature of carriers that can transport and launch individual fighters or bombers, adding tactical depth. This mechanic is highlighted as a positive differentiator.
- Mission variety and pacing (weight 0.1): Reviews note good mission variety and well-paced progression, keeping the campaign engaging. The mixture of mission types maintains interest.
- Challenging difficulty settings (weight 0.1): The Hard difficulty is noted as appropriately challenging, providing a satisfying level of difficulty for skilled players. The pacing on Hard is praised as excellent.

Common complaints:
- Bugs and glitches (weight 0.38): Multiple players report bugs, ranging from minor annoyances to more serious issues like save corruption and mission-breaking glitches. The game lacks polish.
- Lacks keybinding options (weight 0.34): There is no menu to remap controls, and hotkeys are unfamiliar or nonsensical. Players expect standard RTS keybinding flexibility.
- Missing multiplayer mode (weight 0.28): Players report the complete absence of LAN, P2P, or any multiplayer functionality, limiting the game to single-player campaign and skirmish. This is a major feature gap for an RTS title.
- Voice acting poor (weight 0.28): Voice acting is criticized as stiff, phoned in, or AI-generated, particularly in the human campaign. This reduces immersion and narrative quality.
- Pathfinding issues persist (weight 0.24): Units often fail to navigate complex paths, can get stuck, and struggle with small gaps, especially before certain tech unlocks. This negatively impacts both micro and macro gameplay.
- Missing RTS commands (weight 0.24): Basic RTS functions like Shift for queued actions, Ctrl+number for unit groups, and building waypoints are absent. This makes the game feel incomplete for genre veterans.
- Story is generic (weight 0.23): The narrative is described as clichéd, predictable, and bland. Several players noted the story lacks originality and fails to engage.
- Difficulty spikes erratically (weight 0.12): The difficulty jumps unexpectedly, even on story mode, with spikes around missions 14-16 and after mission 20. This can frustrate players.
- Performance and stuttering (weight 0.11): The game suffers from stuttering and lack of fluidity, affecting overall polish. These issues are noticeable and detract from the experience.
- Resolution support limited (weight 0.11): Only a few resolution options exist, with no 4K or ultra-wide support, capping at 1080p. This is disappointing for players with modern displays.
- No game speed control (weight 0.11): Players cannot adjust game speed, which is a standard feature in RTS games and limits replayability and accessibility.
- Graphics dated (weight 0.1): The game does not have high-end or modern graphics, which may disappoint players expecting contemporary visuals.

Gameplay feedback:
- Classic RTS gameplay (weight 0.83): The game is repeatedly described as an old-school real-time strategy game, reminiscent of Command and Conquer and Starcraft, with a retro atmosphere and modern touches. It features base building, resource gathering, and classic RTS mechanics.
- Extensive campaign mode (weight 0.74): Players highlight a massive single-player campaign with over 50 missions, divided into chapters, featuring voiced mission briefings and scripted story events. This appears to be a core strength of the game.
- Multiple distinct factions (weight 0.7): The game offers five asymmetric factions or races, each with unique units, traits, and play styles, with a sixth available in an expansion. This variety is consistently mentioned as a positive feature.
- Single-player focus, no multiplayer (weight 0.43): The game is currently single-player only, lacking a multiplayer mode. Players note this as a limitation, but it does not detract from the single-player experience.
- Skirmish mode available (weight 0.21): The game includes an AI skirmish mode in addition to the campaign, offering additional replayability for single-player fans. This mode is separate from the main story.
- Smart AI behavior (weight 0.2): The AI is noted for its intelligent tactics, such as flanking, probing defenses, and targeting workers, making battles more challenging and dynamic.
- Space setting (weight 0.1): The game is set in space, focusing on space-based combat without land-based elements, which distinguishes it from other RTS games.
- Difficulty options (weight 0.09): Players appreciate the inclusion of multiple difficulty settings, allowing them to tailor the challenge to their preference, from casual to challenging.
- Pathfinding system (weight 0.09): The game features a pathfinding system for unit movement, though it is not elaborated upon. It may contribute to the overall strategy experience.

Performance notes:
- Performance issues (weight 0.32): Multiple reports indicate the game experiences significant performance issues such as lag, stuttering, and unstable frame rates, which can occur randomly or later in play, making the game feel unoptimized and sometimes unplayable.
- Random freezes and glitches (weight 0.15): The game can flash white or freeze after too many reloads, and screen switching or scrolling outside the active window can also freeze the screen, leading to glitchy and buggy experiences.
- Optimization remains problematic (weight 0.14): Despite some resolutions being acceptable, general optimization still has issues, with players experiencing stutter and lack of fluidity, indicating ongoing technical challenges.
- High population causes stutters (weight 0.12): Players report microstutters and lag when there is a high population in the game, as well as significant FPS drops when many events occur on the map simultaneously, which can disrupt gameplay.
- Graphics need optimization (weight 0.11): Some players feel that the graphics require further optimization, and at the maximum resolution of 2560x1440, the game appears blurry on 4K screens, indicating a need for improved resolution scaling and texture updates.
- Runs decently on low-end (weight 0.05): One player notes that the game runs decently on low-end hardware such as an i7-4710HQ with an 840M and 12GB RAM, suggesting that performance may be acceptable for some configurations.

Recommendations:
- Recommended for classic RTS fans (weight 0.88): The most common sentiment is that the game appeals strongly to fans of classic real-time strategy games, especially those who enjoyed StarCraft, Command and Conquer, and similar titles. Many reviewers highlight its nostalgic value and old-school gameplay style.
- Great StarCraft alternative (weight 0.24): Many reviewers recommend the game as a solid alternative to StarCraft or classic RTS titles, with one calling it the best StarCraft alternative on the market. It seems to fill a niche for players seeking similar gameplay.
- Not for general audiences (weight 0.23): Some reviewers caution that the game is not for everyone, catering to a niche audience of 90s RTS players, and hard to recommend for general audiences. It may be too dated or lacking in polish for mainstream players.
- Awaiting fixes or sale (weight 0.21): Several reviewers mention they will wait for fixes, a sale, or a lower price before purchasing, citing issues that need addressing or the game not being worth its full price. This suggests the game has notable flaws despite its appeal.
- Low price justifies purchase (weight 0.17): Several reviewers mention that the game is worth its price, especially when on sale, with one noting it is appropriately priced at $20. This suggests that value for money is a positive aspect for many.
- Not recommended without multiplayer (weight 0.15): A few reviewers explicitly state that they cannot recommend the game until it adds LAN or P2P multiplayer, and others note that it may not be suitable for players who require multiplayer features. This indicates a significant gap for some potential buyers.
- Issues but still fun (weight 0.13): Some reviewers acknowledge issues but still recommend the game because it is fun, with one stating it is worth the price despite missing features. This balanced view can help set expectations.
- Suggested to try demo first (weight 0.09): Two reviewers suggest trying the demo before buying, implying that the game may not be for everyone and that potential buyers should test it first. This adds a cautious note to recommendations.
- Singleplayer content recommended (weight 0.09): Some reviewers specifically recommend the game for its singleplayer content, with one suggesting it for those who don't care about multiplayer. This indicates the campaign mode is a strong point.
- Buy to support developers (weight 0.09): A few reviewers encourage purchasing the game to support the developers, with one noting that the developers keep updating it. This positive sentiment can influence buying decisions.
- Good for casual and expert (weight 0.05): One reviewer notes the game is suitable for a wide range of players, from beginners to experts, which may indicate that it has accessible gameplay mechanics. This broad appeal could be a plus.
- Look at alternatives instead (weight 0.05): One reviewer suggests considering other games like StarCraft, Homeworld, and Sins of a Solar Empire, implying the game may not hold up against them. This is a caution for discerning players.
- Niche satisfaction guaranteed (weight 0.05): One reviewer notes that if you are in the niche of 90s RTS players, you will be very satisfied, reinforcing the game's appeal to a specific audience. This ties back to the niche nature of the game.
- Price compared to competitors (weight 0.05): One reviewer mentions that the game is not worth the same price as the base game of Age of Empires II Definitive, and is a hard sell with free-to-play StarCraft games. This highlights a value concern.
- Check negatives before buying (weight 0.04): One reviewer advises checking other negative reviews before making a purchase, indicating potential pitfalls that might not be obvious. This is useful guidance for undecided buyers.
- Handle with open mind (weight 0.04): One reviewer advises keeping an open mind and not comparing the game directly to classics, suggesting it has its own merits. This can help set expectations for newcomers.
- Conditional recommendation (weight 0.04): One reviewer's recommendation is conditional on addressing minor concerns, meaning the game may need small fixes to be fully satisfying. This could be a deciding factor for some.
- Avoid if lag issues (weight 0.04): One reviewer warns not to buy if you are avoiding lag issues or lacking large-scale skirmish maps, indicating potential performance and content limitations. This is a specific caveat.
- Worth ten bucks (weight 0.04): One reviewer suggests the game is worth ten dollars and a couple of hours to re-experience an experimental era of RTS, especially on sale. This indicates a low-budget purchase is appropriate.

Other player notes:
- Frequent comparisons to StarCraft (weight 0.88): Many reviews directly compare the game to StarCraft, describing it as a clone or carbon copy set in space. Others note similarities to StarCraft: Brood War and StarCraft 1, particularly in atmosphere and gameplay.
- Comparisons to classic RTS titles (weight 0.6): The game is frequently compared to classic RTS games like Command & Conquer, Age of Empires, and Red Alert, with some reviewers noting nostalgia value. It is also compared to Star Trek: Armada and Conquest: Frontier Wars, which some reviewers see as the true reference points.
- Multiplayer currently unavailable (weight 0.34): Several reviews note that the game has no multiplayer at the time of review. This is seen as a limitation, but some reviewers mention that it is in development and expected in the future.
- Developer support is active (weight 0.23): Reviewers highlight that the developers actively update the game with patches and improvements. This ongoing support is viewed positively and reassures players about the game's future.
- Small development team (weight 0.23): Multiple reviews mention that the game is developed by only a two-person team, which is seen as impressive given the game's scope. This fact is often noted as a remarkable achievement.
- Good value for price (weight 0.19): Reviewers note that the game offers a large amount of content, including over 50 missions, at a relatively low price. This is considered a good deal and a positive point.
- Expansion adds sixth faction (weight 0.18): The expansion adds a sixth faction to the game, which is mentioned in reviews as a notable content addition. This expansion is sometimes referred to as 'Renegades'.
- Nostalgic tribute to classic RTS (weight 0.11): The game is described as a love letter to classic 90s RTS games, combining old-school mechanics with a modern touch. Reviewers appreciate this blend and see it as a successful homage.
- Fully voiced but cheesy (weight 0.1): The game is fully voiced in English, but the voice acting can be cheesy at times. While this adds to the charm for some, others may find it lacking in quality.
- Chinese language support available (weight 0.09): The game includes Chinese language support, which may be important for players who prefer to play in Chinese. This is likely to broaden the game's appeal to Chinese-speaking audiences.

Emotions:
- Frustration (weight 0.28): Players are frustrated by numerous technical and design flaws, including severe save-system bugs that corrupt files, unpolished controls missing standard RTS functions, and pathfinding issues that leave units stuck. The economy forces slow cash accumulation, while unfair difficulty spikes and omniscient AI that targets weak points lead to frequent restarts and mission losses.
- Enjoyment (weight 0.19): The core gameplay provides strong enjoyment through classic RTS mechanics, a long and varied campaign, and multiple unique factions. Players appreciate the nostalgic style, satisfying ship combat and building, and the game's overall fun factor, which outweighs many of its flaws.
- Disappointment (weight 0.15): Disappointment stems from a lack of polish, including subpar voice acting, missing standard RTS hotkeys, resolution limitations, and performance drops. The absence of multiplayer mode and a cliffhanger story ending further contribute to feelings of letdown, making the game fall short of its potential.
- Satisfaction (weight 0.11): Players feel satisfied with the game's overall quality, noting excellent music, map design, and a well-executed classic RTS experience. The lengthy single-player campaign, varied missions, and good AI provide a fulfilling experience, with responsive developer support adding to the positive impression.
- Frustrated (weight 0.11): This emotion is driven by missing essential RTS commands like using the SHIFT key for building queues and waypoints, which hampers gameplay efficiency. Frequent bugs, performance issues, and UI problems such as ESC not opening the menu compound the frustration, along with instant defeat when heroes die and difficulty spikes.
- Excitement (weight 0.1): Excitement arises from the addictive skirmish mode, a massive campaign, and the promise of future content like the Renegade expansion. The game's fast pace, fantastic AI, and nostalgic classic RTS style hook players, while interesting units like nuclear torpedo ships and carriers add to the thrill.
- Appreciation (weight 0.08): Players appreciate the game's unique position as a throwback to the experimental era of RTS games, with refined 2D effects, distinctive race designs, and full voice acting. The developers' responsiveness to feedback and the game's solid gameplay, art style, and lengthy campaign earn genuine appreciation, especially given the small team size.
- Gratitude (weight 0.05): Gratitude is expressed for the developers' dedication in creating the game and their active listening to community feedback. Players are thankful to have found a gem that fills a void in the RTS genre, with a substantial campaign that warrants support.
- Annoyance (weight 0.04): Annoyance is caused by quality-of-life issues such as unchangeable resolution without 4K support, clunky ability controls, and tedious resource gathering. The repetitive economy micromanagement and inability to disable unit responses also irritate players, along with uninspired visual choices.
- Nostalgia (weight 0.04): The game evokes strong nostalgia for 90s classic RTS titles, with its retro style and gameplay reminiscent of the genre's golden age. Players feel a fond connection to the past, enhanced by modern graphics that preserve the old-school charm.
- Enthusiasm (weight 0.04): Enthusiasm is generated by the game's resemblance to Blizzard RTS games with a good story and factions, providing a classic throwback experience. The solid old-school gameplay with tactical combat and varied races reignites childhood enthusiasm, making it highly engaging.
- Disappointed (weight 0.03): Players are disappointed that the promising game lacks deep execution and offers nothing new, especially without multiplayer mode. Mission achievements that appear easy but are nearly impossible also contribute to this feeling of unmet expectations.
- Impressed (weight 0.03): Impression is driven by the impressive quality and content from a very small development team, with the game nearly flawless. The excellent core including campaign, units, buildings, AI, and map editor showcases remarkable achievement and craftsmanship.
- Fun (weight 0.03): The gameplay provides fun through challenging and varied skirmish matches against AI, offering a journey back to the golden age of RTS. The overall experience is enjoyable and engaging, keeping players entertained.
- Admiration (weight 0.03): Admiration is for the game's epic graphics and artist-level art design, demonstrating genuine hand-crafted quality. The game pays tribute to old-school RTS with modern touches, earning praise for its gameplay and developer support for multiple keyboard control schemes.
- Confusion (weight 0.03): Players are confused by certain unit behaviors, such as not prioritizing attacks on detected invisible frontline units, which seems illogical. They also question negative reviews given the game's quality and find some hidden mechanics like Alt for health bars unclear.
- Annoyed (weight 0.02): Annoyance stems from lag in skirmish and some campaign maps making them unplayable, disrupting the experience. The writing also breaks immersion, further irritating players.
- Anticipation (weight 0.02): Anticipation is built through a compelling story twist at the end of chapter 2, leaving players eager to continue. The hope of discovering more good missions drives excitement for future gameplay.
- Approval (weight 0.02): Approval is given for the game's attractive 2D sprite-based isometric visuals and its faithful adherence to classic RTS design with fantastic unit and base ideas. The old-school style is executed well, earning positive reception.
- Immersion (weight 0.02): Immersion is achieved through the game's ability to foster genuine curiosity and a desire to learn, drawing players into its world. Players find themselves easily lost in the game, indicating strong engagement.}