Planetary Annihilation review

Tech demo-lition.

Planetary Annihilation is a real-time strategy game founded on a dream, and funded on an image. The dream was a noble one: the robotic conflict of Total Annihilation on an interplanetary scale. The image? A moon, rigged with the enormous engines of player one, rocketing straight towards a temperate world hosting the impenetrable base of an unsuspecting player two.

This month Uber Entertainment declared Planetary Annihilation complete and is selling the finished game with an even more arresting image: a screenshot of the "Annihilaser" which arrived in the last patch, allowing players to turn any of their metal planets into a Death Star and pop celestial bodies like balloons.

For posterity's sake, then: is this the biggest, silliest RTS ever?

Sadly not. Just as Supreme Commander imagined endgame units towering over crowds of smaller robots, Sins of a Solar Empire bore a proud, operatic texture or R.U.S.E. chased after emotional peaks, Planetary Annihilation only makes headway in yet another kind of scale. Yes, you can annihilate a planet by building a gun into a moon - orbital craft joining ground, sea and air units as a fourth category - but you're also doing it in the cutest widdle solar system. Scout units will circumnavigate even the largest planets in just a minute or two, and your interstellar transports will rarely take longer than a few minutes to travel between them.

1
Amateurs talk about tactics. Professionals study logistics. Planetary Annihilation just loves STUFF.

Better, then, to focus on the game proper, which seduces almost immediately.

In the style of Total Annihilation, players all start with a mighty-yet-curmudgeonly Commander robot, and win if they eliminate (all) the enemy Commander(s). Picture it: with a few clicks and a shimmering spray of particles your Commander whips up a metal extractor and a power plant, increasing your steady influx of resources. A vehicle factory comes next, as well as some defensive towers. Barely two minutes into the game you'll be producing an unending stream of tanks, your opportunity to expand further limited only by how fast you can click and think.

Your mouth forms an "o" as you notice that the Fabricator robots you can produce at your factories can produce more advanced things than your Commander can, including Advanced Factories. Now you're building artillery emplacements, radar, your huge advanced vehicle factory producing even bigger tanks, and what's this? Oh my goodness! The Advanced Vehicle Factory can produce an Advanced Fabricator! You can't build it fast enough. Click click click, you summon your Commanders and Fabricator vehicles to speed up its construction by spraying their metal particles directly onto the unit.

Finished, the dinky little thing rolls onto the planet. Looks like it can build... a Nuclear Silo?! You set it building, only for the little thing to immediately drain your inadequate power and metal reserves. It takes you just a few seconds to assign orders to your fabricators to build more than 30 metal extractors spanning the entire globe.

2
See the five arms around the laser? Those are the enormous buildings you have to construct to use it.

You see, Planetary Annihilation offers less of a tech tree that players are doggedly climbing up and more of a set of laterally-sprawling monkey bars. You want to fill the skies with planes? Sure. Feel like harvesting the resources of the nearby gas giant, letting you spew out the most advanced robots without a second thought? You got it. Every construction hints at what you might build next and all of it looks lovely. Chunky, noisy little robots that lay waste to forests and structures the second they open fire.

Your first few hours with Planetary Annihilation will see you thrilling at this as you and your stocky little Commander trundle slowly through one of the randomised Galactic War campaigns, picking up new tech and taking joy in the construction of thingies and the destruction of other thingies.

Where Planetary Annihilation started to lose me is the instant the game began getting tougher. As you'd imagine, I started wanting to learn the correct answer to what factory to build first, and which of the four unit types to build from any given factory, and in what combination. I wasn't expecting StarCraft-like levels of balance, but I wanted to learn the point of all these toys. In what situations should you choose robot factories over vehicles? The seas, when they appeared, always seemed peculiarly small. Why the sprawling naval tech tree? What good are flamethrower tanks? When's it worth building base defences when the enemy can approach from anywhere?

3
You know what I think is next? The option to select your units, bases, even planets and toggle AI on and off.

These are questions with one ugly answer. There are two games tucked away in Planetary Annihilation. The colourful one comprising its opening hour, full of variety and promise, and what it actually is: players racing to draw the quickest, ugliest lines through all of its content.

Utilising the game's secret third resource of clicks-per-minute, you want to get your economy up and running as fast as possible (pros recommend using mod assistance to smooth out the game's interface), first producing fabricators and then sending them roaming across the planet to metal extractors as fast as possible. Meanwhile, you want to construct factory after factory, spewing out tanks, and with any mental faculties you have left you'll want to be dispatching tanks around the world to crush any and all metal extractors and fabricators you find. Naval units are almost useless, while planes can be lethal. Advanced tech can be safely ignored until you're involved in the business of harassing your opponent's own factory construction. Altogether it's a tense but ultimately exhausting exercise in micromanagement, and compares unfavourably with other modern RTS games in terms of breadth and depth.

Things are most awkward of all in Planetary Annihilation's own personal new frontier: the additional dimension of interstellar combat. Spacecraft have by far the least variety of any unit type, and ordering them around the solar system is the most taxing and least enjoyable aspect of the game. There's no large-scale transport unit, either, so in any single-player campaign games without advanced space tech (with which you could build a teleporter from orbit), launching a planetary invasion means loading a crowd of units into an equally sized fleet of single-unit transport craft. A logistical operation with all the appeal of counting sand.

4
My commander stuck in a trench, attaining a hierarchical position above ASIMO but beneath the Mars Rover.

All of which is an underwhelming challenge to try and master and it's unpleasant to be on the receiving end of it, with tiny little groups of units ceaselessly raiding your handiwork. After being burned once when the AI took out my main power plant, I got into the habit of having fabricators building an unending string of power plants on multiple planets, just so my teleporters and factories would stay online. The entire game is like this. Strategy takes a backseat to speed, efficiency and swarming your opponents.

None of which is inherently terrible, and a lot of people will look past this for the chance to simply experience an epic 5v5 game, or a similarly mad 2v2v2v2v2v2v2. But it's still a style of play that massively limits Planetary Annihilation's appeal even before you get into the comparatively light single-player component and the occasional bug. I had matches where the AI stopped after building a couple of structures, as well as one amazing game where my chosen spawn point dropped my proud commander in an inescapable canyon.

Don't get me wrong. I do still think that featuring a Death Star in an RTS is a fantastic achievement. I just wish they'd also included something worth fighting for.

6 /10

Read the Eurogamer.net reviews policy

Sometimes we include links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.

Jump to comments (65)

About the author

Quintin Smith

Quintin Smith

Contributor

Quinns has been writing about games for a decade. If you see him online, please be gentle. He'll be using a shotgun no matter the circumstances and will not be very good.

Related

You may also enjoy...

Comments (65)

Comments for this article are now closed. Thanks for taking part!

Hide low-scoring comments
Order
Threading
There's no large-scale transport unit, either, so in any single-player campaign games without advanced space tech (with which you could build a teleporter from orbit), launching a planetary invasion means loading a crowd of units into an equally sized fleet of single-unit transport craft. A logistical operation with all the appeal of counting sand.
This comment, coupled with your multiple attacks on the requirement of click speed and micro, suggests that you've not fully explored all of the command and control features in PA.

They include some really powerful area commands, which means you can queue up huge strings of orders in a couple of clicks. For example, you can order your fabricators to carpet the planet in metal extractors with a simple click and drag. In the example you gave above, you can select multiple orbital transport units, and use an area load command to order them to pick up a unit each, again with one click and drag. Then instead of one piddly little multi-transport, you suddenly have an INVASION ARMADA.

Please take a look at the area commands in particular. They are incredibly powerful and since your main gripe with this game seems to be micro-management, I feel like playing with these on will completely change your experience and opinion on how the game plays. There's a load more stuff that the article suggests you may have missed but really this is long enough for one comment.
That's only the first 6/10 today
I finally understood why 42 is "the answer to life, the universe and everything" - because score here at Eurogamer is either 8 (4*2) or 6 (4+2).
In addition to the area commands, which make ordering large numbers of units around a dream (seriously, all RTSes should have this feature from now on), I think the reviewer missed two important features that would have greatly reduced the level of mental taxation he experienced, and makes the game much more manageable, even on multiple planets.

Namely, these are Picture in Picture (PiP) and the notifications bar.
Firstly, PiP allows you to open a separate, smaller, and fully functional window in yeh corner of the main display. This means, for example, if you have trouble finding the enemy commander to nuke, just open up PiP when you've found him, leave that screen open, return to your base to select the nukes, or whatever units you want to use, and issue the command to those units IN THE SMALL WINDOW. Another example is to have the PiP window open showing the orbital view, so whilst you build up your base early game, you can see when opponents have started to venture to new planets, or death stars in particular. Or press T to track the selecte unit, say a scout, and open it up in PiP so you can see what that scout sees along it's route, whilst still building your base. At least one more function includes creating a mirror view in the PiP so that at all times, you can see both sides of a planet.

Secondly, you have the notifications, both audible and visual. When something big happens, like you detect an enemy commander, or something of yours is destroyed, or Halley rockets are activated, or discovered, a little bar pops up at the top to notify you. Hover over it and a little screen pops up to show you exactly where this is. Click on it to go straight there. This GREATLY reduces the amount of overseeing you have to do, as it means you can concentrate on your most important orders, while you know that, should something of note happen, you can skip there in an instant.

I would be very keen to hear if the reviewer made use of these at all? If so, did they find the, useful or not, and why did they not mention them when discussing the difficulty in managing so much at once?

Other than that, I pretty much agree with the score, although I'd give it a 7/10 now, and moving up to 8-10 once/ missing features like offline, and saves, and asteroid belts/unit cannons are added, as well as a fleshed out galactic war, with multiplayer. Some of these are definitely still in progress, others are less certain.

P.s anyone know how to tag the reviewer in this to get a response to my question? Or at least flag their attention to the points in made...
I backed this on Kickstarter but just find the scale overwhelming (in a bad way). Everything seems unfocused and laborious to do. Looks great though when everything is in motion.

Still glad it got made, but it's just not for me.
The author complains about difficult logistical operations, but I think that they simply didn't discover many of the powerful commands hidden within the game. To be fair, this is likely because the game doesn't do a very good job of explaining itself.

What the author should have been using are area commands, thus allowing them to transport large numbers of units with just a few clicks. Indeed, these commands are a lynchpin of the game and make it one of the least micro-intensive RTS games around.

I suspect you would find this handy: Planetary Annihilation Controls and User Interface Tutorial

It would be better if the game had a fully fleshed out tutorial, but until then it's guides like these that will help you unlock the power of the user interface.
The biggest problem with PA is that it's just not finished: The single player is an utterly barebones Dawn of War: Dark Crusade affair. There aren't enough units, especially for invading planets. Maps take an age to load. No saving mid-game. Naval units are utterly useless in all but the most specific situations, when they become adequate. The tutorial is non-existent, or at least I didn't find one in game.

They say they're going to continue updating, so maybe one day it'll be a full game.

Opinions time! The UI is one of the best I've used in an RTS, and it's mostly down to the area commands. Want your tanks to blow up a base? Click and drag an attack circle over it and they'll happily blow stuff up until it's all gone. Want some patrolling defenses? Select an air factory, click and drag the patrol command to cover your base, then tell it to build fighters forever. Not to mention being able to queue commands like its ancestors.

It's also one of the least micro-intensive RTSs I've played, in large part thanks to the queue command. Compared to Starcraft II or Dawn of War the clicking is as intense as The Sims. You can still dance your units, split push and all that jazz, but planning an efficient economy is much more important so you can keep churning out the units.
It's a question that needs addressing - if the reviewer doesn't play the game in the way it was intended, if everyone else who plays it does, and the comments alert us to that, where do we stand with the review? Is this game significantly under-rated because of the reviewer's misunderstandings? Or would they argue that the score given was not marked up or down because of that. Or maybe if the reviewer did not pick up on how the game should be played, it's the game's fault for not making it clear enough.

I recall we had the same problem with Strike Suit Zero, where the reviewer hit a brick wall on his first 'suit' mission that took him hours to overcome because he didn't pay attention to the mission briefing given over comms. Anyone who did knew to hover in a certain place and auto-lock on and fire for a few minutes, a five-year-old could do it. The game was marked down due to difficulty.
@prudislav offline LAN FTW
@DrStrangelove
Hahaha, you cheeky bugger.
I feel it too, though. It must be destiny.

As for this game, it looks interesting, and let's be fair, we need more RTS's. What the hell happened to this wonderful genre?
I like the art style a lot though I fail to see the strategic side of BUILD EVERYTHING AND MOVE IT TOWARDS THE ENEMY BASE that the total annihilation games have.
I still play Total Annihilation; I'm still trying to finish the Kroggoth encounter :$
@2old4disshit The soundtrack is absolutely incredible. Full orchestral just like TA. Howard Mostrom has done amazingly well with it.
@2old4disshit It has a full orchestral score, just like TA.
@Quitch I shared many of the author's issues with the UI. Thanks for this link - I'll give it a read and then give the game a second shot.
Sounds to me like reviewer is Starcraft player that never played Total Annihilation game and Total Annihilation Spring.
From what i know, the UI is TASpring with upgrades, which is one of the best designed UI in the genre

Sure game is unfinished, but this review is just rished and reviewer sounds like a total newbie. Not that i'm surprised, Path of Exile review was about the same quality.
@Frosty840 it's incredibly easy. For whatever command you want just click and hold, and a circle should appear. This is the area your command will take effect in, if you drag to past the edge of the visible planet, it will be a planet wide order. So, things like setting a factory to automatically send all of its units on a total planet patrol. Or telling a fabricator to build metal extractors over one whole area, or the whole planet if you are alone ;). It also works for things like unit loading. So, build 100 transporters, double click one to select them all, click the load unit command button at the side, then click and drag a circle out around a huge blob of your army and the transports will pick them all up. It takes away a lot of the annoying micro, making the game much more macro orientated.
Indeed the reviewer states that this macro spam gameplay is a negative, but I find the logistical challenge one of the greatest pleasures of the game. That and smashing moons into people ;)

If you didn't notice area command does that mean you haven't encountered line builds? So, for buildings that aren't metal extractors, dragging a line would build them in a nicely spaced straight line. So, you could just plonk down a nice neat line of energy generators , or ten factories, with just one click drag.
I was replaying Total Annililation recently at 1080p. Still looks and plays great. There is a brutal simplicity to it, all hard edged robots and machines with no frills, and the orchestral can't be beaten. It is to RTS' s what Super Mario World was to platformers.

Not really interested in Planetary Annihilation though
I bought it when there was that sale and I like it, though I only play single player. It does need some padding to give it a little more depth I think.
@Zeffi SupCom is a very specific type of RTS with an economy that scales up from tiny tier 1 to gigantic superunits.
SupCom2 is pretty much just a bunch of tier 1 units, then some bigger units that don't work very well.

I remember playing through the singleplayer portion of SupCom2, which was depressing, but when I started playing a few skirmishes and saw the new "Spring Duel" map, and compared it to SupCom's "Winter Duel" map, I knew I wouldn't be able to stick with the game.

Winter Duel is a cramped map, but it's by no means a small map. There's a real feeling of space and freedom to build your own side as you oppose the other player.
Spring Duel is just a nasty, cramped mess. The same thing applies when looking at any of the other maps that were ported from SupCom to SupCom2.

SupCom2 has none of the sense of scale and buildup that SupCom has.
Sure you can shape your faction with the science tree thing (I forget what it's called) but to me that was just makework that put arbitrary prerequisites in the way of building a side I actually liked...

At the end of the day, SupCom2 is just-another-RTS. If I'm going to play just-another-RTS there are far better just-another-RTSes to play. SupCom2 was redundant and basically "stole" the sequel I and many other SupCom fans were looking for by being a completely different type of game.
@Koozer I'll have to look into these "area commands". Haven't spotted them in the UI so far, but you've already mentioned the lack of tutorial...
I wonder if the autogenerated maps are the problem, maybe handmade maps designed with chokepoints and such would lessen the feeling of everything being a chaotic mess.
@HotCoffee MOBA's
I'm a kickstarter backer and I believe that they delivered exactly what was expected from them following the Total Annihilation formula but yes, there are some bugs that need to be corrected.

During all the project phase the community managers were absurdly responsive and participate very actively on the feedback provided by the community.

This game needs some dedication if you want to see it shine, the learning curve is slow and the current tutorial is a real crap (for new players) so the AI will probably rape you during the battles.

I still recommend the game if you like macro management RTS

PS: Also dont forget that this game support MODs so if the company behind it don't do something that is needed, the community will.
To be fair to Quintin, the lack of tutorials is diabolical.
Basically, it's not even nearly as good as the still utterly sublime Sup Com Forged Alliance.
@Cartho

I do agree. Supreme Commander Forged Alliance is the single best RTS ever conceived. I would have sold my soul for an updated version of that, mainly to make it run better with multiple large armies.

The biggest problem with Planetary Annihilation is that when you play against AI you need eyes and ears everywhere. Playing on a cumbersome spherical battlefield is not as fun as it looks.
The AI never tires and can do everything everywhere at once.

In SupCom FA you had great sea battles and wonderful large fleets, but in this game there is no reason to build ships at all. The largest seas are as big as a lake.

The planets can look big at first, but somehow the battlefields always feel like they are tiny and claustrophobic.

If only GPG would want to upgrade/modernize my SupCom FA... I would be willing to pay a good deal of money for that.
SupCom FA is the only RTS I personally think is worth playing.
Well.. I like the first series of Dawn of War games very much too, but SupCom is king.
I really enjoy playing skirmish against AI (they're tough and smart) The secret to this game is learning the key-bindings.

Use the mouse to do anything but tell things where to go and shoot and you're not going to be playing fast enough.
@HotCoffee It turned into inaccessible CPMfests like this mess.
I mean, I loved SupCom and TA, but SupCom2 was a mess before it was patched and still dreadful afterwards, and PA is just... Bleh.

It's probably not feasible to implement, but I think that a game that played something conceptually like the first stage of Spore would have been interesting to see. Something that would have allowed you to build at a smaller scale, fielding smaller units on a limited map, against similarly small opponents, before winning your local map and thereby scaling up to larger battles, eventually becoming a planetary, then an interplanetary force.
That's actually fairly similar to how a lot of the SupCom singleplayer maps played out, come to think of it.

As it is, you just build a bunch of level 1 units and throw them at the other guy, forever. There's really nothing that speaks of a planetary scale to the engagements except for the fact that the battlefields are spherical. If you put one of SupCom's Fatboy mobile fortress/factories on a PA world, I get the impression that it would cover about a quarter of a planet's surface. That's how broken the scale is...
@DrStrangelove guess we won't be able to buy that either then :(
"Don't get me wrong. I do still think that featuring a Death Star in an RTS is a fantastic achievement. I just wish they'd also included something worth fighting for."
Star Wars: Empire At War has you covered. Also not perfect but sounds a lot more fun.
Been playing this for a while and completely agree, nice looking game but flawed.

@Frosty840 Why don't people like SupCom 2? Genuine question (personally I like it)
As a solus RTS fan back in the day, I wish this review had talked more about the single-player mode, and less about the reviewer's strange inability to play the game for fun rather than efficiency...
What was wrong with just doing Total Annihilation with somewhat more second decade of the 21st century maps and maybe updated unit models? (I.e. think the Skyrim map in terms of terrain, but with fat arse robots roaming around it? Loads of trees to suck up for energy, Mining spots aplenty, room to expand). You know it would make sense.
Why do all 'reviews' nowadays all talk in the abstract, like you are telling a story of an experience? Any experience can be positive or negative, partial or complete, with the next experience being something completely different.

This review doesn't really talk objectively about the game at all.
There have been comments already about the advanced command and control features this game has to offer.
Furthermore, this game is just not a CPM game at all. Yes you need attention, yes if you play competitively you're going to need to be fast, but that does not mean that you cannot enjoy the game at your own pace.

Further, and more importantly, as already stated, there are many ways you can make the UI work for YOU. For example Picture In Picture is a cool feature allowing you to keep track of multiple places at once - See an overview/guide/tutorial that I created recently discussing how to use the PIP.

But for goodness sake - reviews need to start being objective.
Too much Real Time Efficiency these days and not enough Real Time Strategy.

Someone needs to take the economy back out of these games. It's completely taken over.
Ah Sup Com, you wonderous thing. Nothing quite beats massed naval warfare in FA. Ballistic missile subs lurking off coastlines, firing a shower of tactical cruise missiles at coastal defences before slipping silently beneath the waves and relocating, the massive coastal artillery batteries setup to ward off battlecruisers, the torpedo bombers prowling for submarines.

Pure joy
@Marshii
But for goodness sake - reviews need to start being objective.
that's not a review.
How is singleplayer in this? I loved playing TA and SupCom againts AI back in the day (never actually went online!). And what about the campaigns. Review mentioned randomised Galactic War thingie but never explained it...
@Dr_Z OMG! True! PIP is awesome. Totally agree with your comments.
PA is far from a finished game, but this review is just ignorant. Reviewer doesn't seem to get some of the basic mechanics that are in the game and doesn't really understand unit balance (even if it isn't perfectly balanced right now) and which units he should use for what. That part about planetary invasions was particularly dull because.
And when he asked the questions "What good are flamethrower tanks?" and "When's it worth building base defences when the enemy can approach from anywhere?" it just shows his inexperience with the game. Infernos are one of the most important units to have in your mix in the front-lines to tank the damage and deal damage to enemies. Regarding the all-directions question, isn't that the whole point of the game? To play on a sphere where you can't turtle up and close the choke-point on one side. It makes you approach your offense and defense differently than you would in most other RTSs, and that's a good thing, one of the strong-points this game has.

PA has a learning curve, and this review is liek it was writen by someone who played the game for 3 or 4 hours and hasn't really understood it. I come through as being defensive here, but I have many complaints about the game as well. I just felt the need to defend the game from this ill-informed reviewer.
I just never really got over the scale in this. They are not planets. They are tiny asteroids. My town is bigger than these planets.
@Frosty840 All good points, deffo agree with the scale issue.
@losaa to be fair, I don't know his tag, so couldn't @ him. And I don't blame a reviewer for not reading every comment on their reviews if someone knows how to draw his attention to my questions, that would be great. Or knows his tag and I'll edit it in.
I'm having more fun with this than i remember having with Total Annihilation 10 odd years ago. Never played SupCom though.
I won't say I'm good at the game but I've beaten the galactic war component several times with an average APM of 11. Area commands and the ability to queue commands is legit.
This review accurately summarises my original complaints with the (otherwise awesome) original Total Annihilation games, and it's disappointing to hear the intervening 17 years didn't give them time to find solutions to it.
@pomi there is no "proper" single player campaign. With story and cutscenes and such. There is skirmish with AI, or there is the galactic war mode. This is basically an RTS rogue like, where you start in a system and click to hop between planets. You start with very little tech, I.e units and factories. And find new tech at each planet. You can only hold so much so you have to pick carefully. Then you fight at some planets, which is basically just a skirmish match against AI. sometimes there are boss fights where you fight several enemies at once on special systems. You can find AI helpers too.
It's fun but can be brutal if you don't have three right tech for a fight, but then that's a rogue like for you.
The devs intend to develop it more, like adding a multiplayer element to it, and presumably more content, but no word on it yet.
Also, the game is not offline yet, you have to be connected to the Uber servers at all time. Offline seems to be proving particularly difficult for them to implement. So if that's a deal breaker, then wait until it's in.
Hmmmm, the problems with PA seem to be the problems I had with Total Annihilation all those years ago. Great start game, but then turned into a slog of repeatedly building masses of different factories to churn out masses of identikit units.
ExelateDataExelateData