Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

AOE III enters platinum age

Ensemble's empire-building PC game is fastest selling of franchise; new contest awards speedy gamers with high-end PC.

Microsoft Game Studios and Ensemble Studios have revealed that Age of Empires III for the PC has gone platinum. No official numbers were released, but both companies tout the strategy game as the fastest-selling chapter of the franchise since being released in October.

To celebrate the game's success, Ensemble is hosting a contest for fans of the game. The company is looking for would-be conquerors to compete against each other to see who can reach the Industrial Age the fastest. Through the game's Web site, contestants can upload recorded games and track the competition.

The fastest fascist will receive a pimped-out computer courtesy of Intel, and the second and third place finishers will be awarded Nvidia 7800GTX and 7800GT graphics cards, respectively.

For more details on Age of Empires III, check out GameSpot's review.

31 Comments

  • flarespot

    Posted Apr 4, 2006 7:35 pm GMT

    Played the Demo of AoE3 and it was a hardware hog and I just didn't like the direction they took with it. Second one was better by far. I think this one sold well just because people assumed this would be better than the second one. In the long run this game will be viewed as a step down. You can quote me on that one.

  • mbbuesslingen

    Posted Feb 11, 2006 8:56 am GMT

    AoE 2 was also good but the thing with the cannons(i like cannons ^^)is much better than before you dont need much of one unit anymore. thats an important iprovement.

  • Shegevara

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 2:38 pm GMT

    All I can say is that aoe2 suck vs. aoe3
    if aoe2 is better than 3 go play then aoe1
    I'm surely joking man. all aoe's rock,

  • XlpranksterlX

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 12:27 pm GMT

    Good game, not shocking, as most news now. Stil good way to get a free PC, it will probably have an extreme edition.

  • JJRD18

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 10:15 am GMT

    AoE 2 was the best, I like AoM a lot but AoE 3 aint worth my money. I rather stick to Civ's IV although is a Turn Based. But if you are a RTS junkie just wait for The Lord of the Rings, The Battle for Middle-earth II or Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends

  • NatusM

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 6:14 am GMT

    "movin' Mussolinis, and quick Qadaffis to compete against each other to see who can reach the Industrial Age the fastest. The fastest fascist..."

    Is this a joke? I don't mean to seem humorless, but I am sure ES does NOT want any of us to even in play emulate either dictator. Not to mention the fact that the dictators and fascism itself have nothiong whatever to do with the Age of Colonization, however horribly the colonists may have treated the natives.

    I am hereby calling for Tim Surette, who obviously does not know what he's talking about regarding AoE3 to correct his blurb before it offends others. This is bad taste gone riot.

  • tony1707

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 5:51 am GMT

    aoe3 is not too bad, but it could be a lot better coming from microsoft and ensemble studios. if someone buy that game is because aoe1 and aoe2 was a really good game in the time.

  • cookien64

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 5:29 am GMT

    meh AoE 2 was way better

  • azizrulez

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 5:28 am GMT

    the rewards sound really awesome

  • chrisdojo

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 5:04 am GMT

    *still playing stronghold*

  • zuzzis

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 4:21 am GMT

    nah.. AOE3 is great game.. it took realy much of my time but it was worth of it.. My thanks for this game..

  • Watership

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 2:56 am GMT

    i believe platinum is 1 million copies sold.

  • s0l0123

    Posted Feb 1, 2006 1:55 am GMT

    I still like AoE2 way better. AoE3 has the graphics, but gameplay seems to be missing.

  • RRU_TheReaper

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 11:59 pm GMT

    I have to agree with wytefang here. It's a 'meh' game that really doesn't do anything 'that' great. Ok RTS for the RTS fans (different than the hardcore fans ;P). So I guess its back to WC3:TFT.

  • jakeboudville

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 11:33 pm GMT

    sweet!

  • wytefang

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 9:34 pm GMT

    I know a lot of RTS players, especially around the local LAN scene and none of them like this game. No one seems to be playing it that's a hardcore RTS fan. The setting/timeframe is rather mundane (yawn, muskets); that seems to be the main problem for most people. I loved some of the innovations they did (home city and the card system) but overall I thought it was fairly 'meh'.

    I'm waiting for Age of Mythology 2, which was my favorite Ensemble game.

  • hieverybody123

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 9:17 pm GMT

    forever_blank
    I haven't played AO3 yet, because it is too pricey. Here in AUS it is $100.00. Which the exquivalent of like $45 American.

    Well - the exchange rate is 1AUD to 0.757ishUSD. So that makes it $75.70-ish American. Thats a huge difference.

    Looking forward to this game

  • Orasion_Seiz

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 7:37 pm GMT

    very nice

  • Snipes33

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 7:02 pm GMT

    Yeah how much?

  • i_love_my_ds

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 6:19 pm GMT

    how much is platinum?

  • ncseric

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 6:10 pm GMT

    Civ 4 has a lot more of an epic scope than AOE 3 does. Granted, AOE has always been a shorter-term game, but AOE 3 seems even shorter scope than AOE 2.

  • Phlakaton

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 5:39 pm GMT

    Sounds like an Enron quarterly report to stock holders. HAHAHA. I hear it took mucho $$ to develop and breaking even will take mucho $$ as well.

  • mhder

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 5:25 pm GMT

    AOE2 online rooms are still packed while AOT has almost no one in them. AOE3? Well I don't know but I think AOE2 has proven to likely be the best of them all

  • LTomlinson21

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 5:19 pm GMT

    sweet.

  • cybergooch

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:58 pm GMT

    Is it just me, or does it seem that AOE 2 was better than 3? The graphics are great, but the game play seems, well, paltry in comparison to the first two, especially the second. Just my opinion...graphics aren't the ONLY thing to consider.

  • coolcool23

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:55 pm GMT

    I'd love to win the competition but Im too slow. I always take my time to get to the next age. LOL!

  • MattRorie

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:54 pm GMT

    It's gone platinum? But they won't reveal sales numbers? So what the heck is that supposed to mean - it's taken on the properties of a rare transition metal?

  • forever_blank

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:49 pm GMT

    I haven't played AO3 yet, because it is too pricey. Here in AUS it is $100.00. Which the exquivalent of like $45 American. Though the graphics do look nice

  • Donkeljohn

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:35 pm GMT

    I don't think I really need to love AOE III

  • chibi-acer

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:34 pm GMT

    I like Age of Empires, but IMO, it kind of pales compared to Rise of Nations. Which is ironic since they're both published (though not developed) by Microsoft.

  • CYbErBoT101

    Posted Jan 31, 2006 4:31 pm GMT

    Got a love AOE3

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Tags

microsoft

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!

Related Game

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires III Boxshot
Follow:
  1. Not Following
    PC: Follow
  2. Not Following
    Macintosh: Follow
  3. Not Following
    BlackBerry: Follow
Add to List
  1. PC
  2. Macintosh
  3. BlackBerry

Follow for the latest news, videos, & tips from experts & insiders

GameSpot Fuse
    Platforms:

    Recent News

    See All News »

    Site Blogs