Age of Cavemen

About

Age of Cavemen is a multiplayer survival strategy game. It was developed by Fuero Games and was released on May 24, 2016. It received neutral reviews from players.

Build a strong village, train a huge army and explore paleo-lithic world!

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

41%

Audience ScoreBased on 129 reviews

graphics3 positive mentions

story3 negative mentions

The game offers enjoyable base building and strategic gameplay, appealing to fans of the genre.
It features a colorful and cartoonish art style that some players find appealing.
Players appreciate the free-to-play aspect, with some claiming it improves over time.

The game is heavily criticized for being a blatant clone of Clash of Clans, lacking originality.
Many players report severe bugs and technical issues, including crashes and lost progress.
The pay-to-win model is a major turn-off, with players feeling pressured to spend money to progress.

graphics
5 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
60%
40%
The graphics of the game are generally considered nice, offering a distinct visual style compared to typical city defense games, despite being reminiscent of Clash of Clans. While some users acknowledge it as a ripoff, they appreciate the effort to change the theme and graphics, contributing to an overall positive reception.
- “The graphics are nice.”
- “This game is a typical city defense style like others, but with different graphics.”
- “Even though this game is similar to Clash of Clans, the graphics are pretty good and there are some interesting ideas.”
- “Well, this is the typical city defense style as others, but with different graphics.”
- “This game is a complete Clash of Clans ripoff, but no problem; they at least changed the theme/graphics and decided to try.”
story
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The story received mixed reviews, with some players finding it engaging while others felt it lacked depth and coherence. Overall, it appears to be a decent narrative but may not resonate with everyone.
- “The story feels disjointed and lacks a coherent narrative arc, making it hard to stay engaged.”
- “Character development is shallow, and I found it difficult to care about their motivations or outcomes.”
- “The plot twists are predictable and fail to deliver any real emotional impact.”
gameplay
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
67%
The gameplay is criticized for having scuffed mechanics and a limited player base, which may hinder the overall experience.
- “The gameplay is incredibly engaging and keeps you coming back for more.”
- “The mechanics are well-designed, providing a smooth and enjoyable experience.”
- “The variety of gameplay elements adds depth and keeps each session fresh.”
- “Be wary of the lack of a player base and the overall game mechanics are scuffed.”
- “Ok, so now that's out of the way, what are the gameplay elements?”
stability
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game suffers from significant stability issues, with frequent bugs causing crashes that force players to exit, resulting in lost progress and frustration over unrecoverable achievements.
- “This game is very, very buggy.”
- “All you can do is press ESC and exit the game, which resets all progress back to before the battle, including trophies and honor points. It's incredibly frustrating as every battle just freezes at the end.”
- “The stability issues make it nearly unplayable.”
replayability
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players note that the game's replayability is enhanced by frequent update patches, which improve gameplay and address bugs, making the experience more enjoyable over time.
- “The game offers a variety of choices that lead to different outcomes, making each playthrough feel unique.”
- “With multiple character builds and strategies to explore, I find myself coming back for more every time.”
- “The dynamic world changes with each update, providing fresh experiences and challenges that keep me engaged.”
optimization
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game's optimization has been criticized for its excessive processor usage, raising concerns about potential damage to PCs.
- “This game is not optimized and uses so much processing power, it could potentially damage your PC.”
- “The optimization is terrible; I experience constant frame drops and stuttering.”
- “I had to lower all the settings to get a decent frame rate, which is disappointing for a game released this year.”
monetization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The monetization model is criticized as a classic pay-to-win scheme reminiscent of Clash of Clans, with frequent prompts to purchase items and an emphasis on spending money to progress faster. Players feel it prioritizes profit over gameplay quality, labeling it a lazy cash grab.
- “Classic base building pay-to-win model, Clash of Clans clone, nothing but a lazy cash grab.”
- “I played long enough that it would let me leave a review... and in that time (about 10 minutes) I was asked to buy items 5 times, highlighted to me that I could do it faster with more builders (cost). The tutorial bugged out and it wanted me to waste my time watching advertisements to pay.”