Siege of Centauri

About

In Siege of Centauri, you assume the role of protector for Earth's first interstellar colony, located in the Proxima Centauri system. Faced with a ruthless alien invasion, you must strategically deploy defense structures and utilize orbital abilities to repel the attackers. With a variety of customization options, adjustable difficulty, and multiple game modes, this real-time strategy game offers an engaging and immersive experience within the Ashes of the Singularity universe.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo

62%

Audience ScoreBased on 257 reviews

graphics30 positive mentions

stability11 negative mentions

Great graphics and sound design enhance the overall experience.
Offers a variety of towers and strategies, providing replayability.
Challenging gameplay that keeps players engaged and encourages experimentation.

Frequent crashes and performance issues hinder gameplay experience.
Lack of clarity in tower mechanics and enemy behaviors can lead to frustration.
Limited campaign length and content may leave players wanting more.

story
94 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
11%
79%
11%
The story in the game is widely criticized for being poorly executed and unengaging, with many players describing it as minimal or lacking depth. Characters often appear inconsistently, and the narrative fails to provide a compelling backdrop for the gameplay, leading to a sense of disconnection during missions. Overall, while the game offers a variety of tower defense mechanics, the storyline is seen as a significant weakness that detracts from the overall experience.
- “Good upgrades and actually good story mode.”
- “Good tower defense game with a storyline, hope they make a sequel.”
- “Nice graphics, good variety of towers and upgrades, mildly interesting story.”
- “The story is rather bad and very poorly explained.”
- “The story is severely lacking and the ending is just bad.”
- “Overall a poorly designed attempt at a tower defense game, zero story, zero interest to keep playing.”
graphics
58 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
52%
43%
5%
The graphics in this tower defense game are generally praised for their quality and visual appeal, standing out compared to typical titles in the genre. While many players appreciate the beautiful artwork and variety of towers, some criticize the clarity of unit differentiation and the blandness of terrain graphics. Overall, the visuals are considered good, though performance issues and a lack of depth in level design have been noted by some users.
- “The graphics are outstanding and the game runs flawlessly.”
- “Graphics are great and the descriptions of what each weapon does is invaluable.”
- “The graphics are crisp and clean, and even with really huge swarms on screen, the framerate didn't noticeably drop.”
- “I didn't like the graphics, and the towers are very hard to tell apart, especially when zoomed out.”
- “- Terrain graphics are pretty bland for a 2019 game.”
- “Maps are horrible (flat, no decorative elements, only textured ground, or few trees in some maps), and I find the graphics pretty unclear and disturbing overall. Units and towers are too small; you don't understand what you are hitting, and you are forced to zoom in to see details. However, if you zoom in, you don't see the entire map. The positioning of towers on the grid is very annoying and inaccurate because of the reasons mentioned.”
gameplay
41 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
32%
56%
12%
The gameplay of this tower defense game has received mixed reviews, with some players enjoying its strategic elements and replayability, while others criticize it for being overly simplistic and lacking depth. Many noted that the campaign is short and the mechanics feel outdated or unpolished, leading to a less engaging experience compared to other titles in the genre. Overall, while there are interesting mechanics and potential for improvement, the gameplay currently feels basic and unbalanced, with some players preferring more dynamic and interactive tower defense experiences.
- “A very fun tower defense game with gameplay similar to Defense Grid.”
- “Interesting mechanics, pretty difficult, replayable, and cheap!”
- “Awesome game, a lot of towers, great graphics and gameplay.”
- “Spending all metal all time and wasting 0 resources or keeping in the bag isn't tower defense gameplay.”
- “There is no 'meat' phase in gameplay where you upgrade towers, use abilities and see how your decisions made in the prep phase affected the next 2/3 or 3/4 of gameplay in the mission; the whole mission is preparation phase, you upgraded 2-3 towers and it ends.”
- “The gameplay is basic even for a tower defense.”
stability
11 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The stability of the game has been widely criticized, with players reporting frequent freezes and crashes, particularly after initial gameplay. While some patches have addressed certain issues, many users still experience significant technical problems, leading to frustration and a lack of recommendation for the game. Overall, the game's stability issues overshadow its potential enjoyment.
- “Official response to hard-locking at ~2m every single boot was 'underclock your video card,' possibly the stupidest thing anyone has ever said about troubleshooting, and then marked the issue as 'resolved.'”
- “By far the biggest issue with Siege of Centauri is how often the game freezes or crashes while playing.”
- “I may change this review with more time but right now cannot recommend it... program is so buggy, makes the CPU burn up a lot of cycles, and crashes.”
replayability
9 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
67%
11%
22%
Overall, the game exhibits high replayability due to a variety of turrets, interesting mechanics, and the ability to create custom maps. However, some players noted a lack of incentive for replaying completed maps due to limited upgrade points. The combination of challenging gameplay and diverse upgrade options contributes to a fun and engaging experience that encourages multiple playthroughs.
- “Tons of turrets to choose from and use during missions adds lots of replayability.”
- “A lot of fun, tower equipment upgrades add to replayability and variability within the same map where you can try different approaches.”
- “The ability to create maps gives it a high replayability.”
- “You always get 1 upgrade point per map completed, so there is no incentive for replayability.”
- “'Standard' tower defense games like Defender's Quest, Gemcraft, and Defense Grid 2 had character progression, randomized tiered tower upgrade drops, and the like, which gave immense replayability.”
music
7 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
57%
43%
The music in the game is generally described as enjoyable and characterful, enhancing the overall experience, though some reviewers found it to be serviceable and somewhat bland. While there are positive mentions of the soundtrack and sound effects, there are also criticisms regarding repetitiveness and a lack of distinctiveness. Overall, the music contributes to the game's atmosphere but may not stand out significantly.
- “Sound effects, music, and loading screens were enjoyable, giving the game some character which kept me playing for longer than I would have otherwise.”
- “It turns out that Siege of Centauri has some fairly obvious references in it that pay homage to Defense Grid, namely the interface looks almost like it was lifted from Defense Grid and some of the music too.”
- “Good music”
- “The victory song plays on a loop, which gets repetitive quickly.”
- “The music and sound are serviceable, but barely noticeable to be honest. 6/10.”
- “It turns out that Siege of Centauri has some fairly obvious references that pay homage to Defense Grid, namely the interface looks almost like it was lifted from Defense Grid and some of the music too.”
optimization
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
17%
50%
Overall, the game's optimization is lacking, with reports of significant CPU strain on high-end systems, particularly during demanding missions. While some users note decent performance, many emphasize the need for improved resource balancing, bug fixes, and general optimization before it can be fully recommended. The graphics, described as dull and sparse, contribute to performance issues despite being less intensive than some competitors.
- “Good performance.”
- “Performance is fortunately far better than EA, but it still looks about as boring as it feels.”
- “The game starts to run out of CPU on my Ryzen 5800X on the last mission, stuttering visibly.”
- “At the moment (July 2019), the game still needs some work and optimization; keep that in mind when you buy this game.”
- “While the game has some promise, it needs better PC optimization, resource balancing, and bug fixes before I can recommend anyone play it.”
grinding
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be tedious, especially on higher difficulty levels, where battles become excessively challenging due to buffs and debuffs. While the towers offer some variety, the limited resources make experimentation feel cumbersome.
- “Beyond hard, it gets a little ridiculous (and tedious) in terms of buffs and debuffs, so I can't recommend playing on anything beyond the hard difficulty level unless you enjoy a very grindy fight.”
- “Towers are fairly varied, but feel very specialized, and with the limited stars available, it's somewhat tedious to experiment.”
monetization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The monetization strategy of the game is widely criticized as a blatant cash grab, with many reviewers feeling it exploits the remaining value of the RTS series without offering substantial content or innovation.
- “This is a cash grab.”
- “Pure cash grab and asset flip to squeeze what little remains of the RTS series.”