Retro Commander

About

Retro Commander is a post-apocalyptic real-time strategy wargame.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

+21

76%

Audience ScoreBased on 172 reviews

gameplay12 positive mentions

grinding3 negative mentions

Fun to play, reminiscent of classic RTS games like Command and Conquer, with a variety of units and strategies.
Great potential for future updates and community engagement, with modding support and a nostalgic art style.
Free to play with enjoyable mechanics, making it accessible for players to try before committing to purchases.

Limited initial content with only a few maps available for free, leading to repetitive gameplay without additional purchases.
Monetization model criticized for requiring payment for essential features like additional maps and mods, which some players find off-putting.
User interface and controls can be clunky and unintuitive, making it difficult for new players to navigate and enjoy the game fully.

gameplay
28 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
43%
46%
11%
The gameplay is generally praised for its enjoyable mechanics and smooth execution, drawing comparisons to classic RTS games like Supreme Commander and Command & Conquer. However, players note that the controls can feel clunky, the tutorial is inadequate, and the objectives are often unclear, which can detract from the overall experience. Additionally, concerns about monetization practices and a lack of strategic depth have been raised, impacting the game's long-term appeal.
- “Some mechanics and quality of life need to be explained a bit more in the tutorial, such as unit ferrying and neutral/civilian buildings, but once you understand the game, this becomes a really straightforward and sharp RTS game with quality elements from its inspirations.”
- “The gameplay is similar to Supreme Commander.”
- “Gameplay exceeded my expectations and has the potential to become an esport with a livestreaming scene, many concurrent players, and an ever-evolving meta.”
- “Despite the game having the worst tutorial ever, I think it had its own unique gameplay, but it also lacked other features.”
- “I bought the maps & mods upgrade after one game because I really dig the gameplay and wanted to support the developers, but then noticed all these weird monetization methods as I kept playing and it just makes the entire experience of starting a round extremely tedious and unfun, and also made me lose my goodwill towards the developers.”
- “The coin pay-to-play, 'map sponsors', and regulatory questionable betting mechanics still exist in the game and is what's advertised to users when you try to play the game as intended, and that makes it not worth the trouble for most people.”
story
27 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
30%
59%
11%
The game's story is generally perceived as underwhelming and simplistic, with many reviewers noting a lack of depth and engaging characters. While some appreciate the humorous tone, others criticize it for feeling juvenile and lacking originality. Additionally, the limited campaign missions and the perception of the game as a demo rather than a full experience detract from the overall narrative enjoyment.
- “This game is very fun and has an interesting story.”
- “Most people who play RTS are looking for a good campaign, a good story.”
- “C&C was good not just for funny multiplayer, but for an epic story and special missions.”
- “Characters are bland and say whatever is needed at the moment, the story progresses slowly and feels aimless for a while. It's quite predictable and simple.”
- “Back to the campaign, the story is really underwhelmingly simple, and the levels lack interesting challenges and incentives to play with strategy.”
- “Very weak story campaign, no plot, no charismatic characters.”
graphics
19 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
37%
47%
16%
The graphics of the game are a mix of retro and modern styles, with many players appreciating the nostalgic pixel art reminiscent of classic titles like Advance Wars and Command & Conquer. While some reviews note that the visuals may not be groundbreaking, they effectively capture the intended aesthetic and contribute to the overall enjoyment of the gameplay. Overall, the graphics are considered good enough to complement the game's depth and mechanics, despite some mixed feelings about their execution.
- “The visuals nail the style that the game is set in and the gameplay is fun.”
- “Graphically, the game is great within the means of its 'retro' art style, and the sprite work and animations are all very enjoyable to witness while causing mass destruction to your enemies.”
- “The modern yet retro graphics are timeless.”
- “Free retro real-time strategy with many features, but very simple graphics.”
- “Art style looks okay in images, but in practice, I disliked it.”
- “I'm not a fan of this aesthetic, but that's on me; it looks good enough and does a great job replicating the retro feel.”
monetization
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
38%
25%
38%
The monetization strategy of the game has been criticized as predatory, with players expressing frustration over microtransactions, in-game gambling, and a lack of realistic payment options. While some appreciate the gameplay and want to support the developers, the convoluted monetization methods detract from the overall experience, leading to disappointment in what could have been a standout RTS title.
- “Removing 'pay per match' was the best decision the developers could make, and I sincerely hope they keep it that way and look at more realistic monetization methods, like offering paid DLC for new classes and official map packs.”
- “I bought the maps and mods upgrade after one game because I really enjoyed the gameplay and wanted to support the developers, but then noticed all these weird monetization methods as I kept playing, which made the entire experience of starting a round extremely tedious and unfun.”
- “But the current monetization method is just self-destructive.”
- “It's a predatory monetization strategy that's further leveraged through in-game match betting (yes, real gambling with coins that are bought with USD) and other methods described below.”
- “I bought the maps & mods upgrade after one game because I really enjoyed the gameplay and wanted to support the developers, but then noticed all these weird monetization methods as I kept playing. It just makes the entire experience of starting a round extremely tedious and unfun, and also made me lose my goodwill towards the developers.”
- “It's disappointing because the game is a 10/10 RTS worthy of an esports and livestreaming scene, but the monetization methods basically ruin what could otherwise be the next RTS.”
humor
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is perceived as inconsistent, with some players finding it juvenile and lacking depth, while others appreciate certain comedic elements and well-crafted moments in the campaign. However, the overall tone is seen as overly generic, with clichéd character names and a script that fails to deliver a strong comedic impact.
- “A little generic with some things like agent 'Johnson' (generic white guy lol) or 'Major Tom', and the origin story is not unique, but it's funny though, well made/scripted (campaign stuff fyi).”
optimization
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
50%
25%
Overall, the game's optimization is praised for its mobile performance, particularly the radar map-like zoom feature. However, players suggest improvements in the selection and mobilization of unit groups, as well as a need for more distinct unit types and structures to enhance visual clarity.
- “I also liked how, when zooming out, it resembled a radar map, which I understand is beneficial for mobile performance.”
- “Only constructive criticism I can provide right now would be for further optimization of selecting groups of units, mobilizing groups of units, and having some more distinct and varied unit types and structures (specifically in the build menu, but on the field would be nice too), as sometimes it can be hard to visually distinguish between them.”
music
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
25%
25%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews; while some players find it charming and well-executed, particularly during combat, others criticize it for feeling disjointed and reminiscent of construction site noises. Additionally, the use of text-to-speech voices for units detracts from the overall audio experience. Overall, the music is seen as a positive aspect, though its implementation could use improvement.
- “Worth noticing is the music, which is good on its own right but the implementation got me the most with combat music fading in and out when there is a battle on screen, not necessarily innovative or impressive but quite charming.”
- “Audio is another positive, and while we don't get exact recreations or knock-off quotes, catch-phrases, or music; what is provided is well done, and can only get better with time.”
- “On top of that, the voices of most units seem to be text-to-speech voices, which makes them super annoying to order around. The 'music' feels like I'm listening to a construction site (and talking about construction, the noises of that are super annoying as well).”
grinding
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
75%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game tedious and unfun, particularly due to the monetization methods that complicate gameplay and create additional burdens for finding opponents. While some enjoy the core gameplay, the overall experience is marred by the excessive grind required to progress.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “This free game is actually just a few tutorial missions which were tedious and some skirmish options.”
- “I bought the maps and mods upgrade after one game because I really enjoyed the gameplay and wanted to support the developers, but then I noticed all these weird monetization methods as I kept playing. It just makes the entire experience of starting a round extremely tedious and unfun, and also made me lose my goodwill towards the developers.”
- “It only adds more tedious tasks for players if you want to find other people to play with.”
stability
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Users report significant stability issues, including bugs when selecting multiple units and frequent freezes during skirmish matches that affect the entire system, not just the game.
- “There are issues with selecting many units at once; it becomes buggy at times.”
- “The game freezes everything in the middle of a skirmish match, not just the game.”
replayability
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
Users express that the game has high replayability, suggesting it will remain engaging and enjoyable for years to come.
- “This will certainly increase the replay value for years to come!”
- “The variety of choices and outcomes makes me want to play again and again!”
- “Each playthrough feels fresh and exciting, offering new experiences every time!”