Slime Rancher vs STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)
Slime Rancher is an FPS open-world game from Monomi Park (2017) while STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is an FPS strategy game from Pandemic Studios (2009).
Quick answer: Slime Rancher rates higher, 8.6 to 8.1 on the GamingPickz Score, and STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is the cheaper at $9.99.
What each one is
Slime Rancher is filed under FPS and Open-World. In contrast, STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) under FPS and Strategy.
Slime Rancher is the tale of Beatrix LeBeau, a plucky, young rancher who sets out for a life a thousand light years away from Earth on the ‘Far, Far Range’ where she tries her hand at making a living wrangling slimes.
Join the rise of Darth Vader’s elite 501st Legion of Stormtroopers as you fight through an all new story-based saga where every action you take impacts the battlefront and, ultimately, the fate of the Star Wars galaxy.
Story, characters and reception
Reception
Slime Rancher The Early Access version of the Slime Rancher received generally positive reviews. Heather Alexandra from Kotaku noticed some bugs, but gave the game a positive review, saying that "I'm not usually a fan of games with catharsis but when I return to my bright and goofy farm at the end of the day? I can't help but smile as wide as my slimy little friends. (Wikipedia)
No Wikipedia detail on file.
At a glance
| Slime Rancher | STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) | |
|---|---|---|
| GamingPickz Score | 8.6/10 | 8.1/10 |
| Steam rating | Overwhelmingly Positive (98%, 156,780) | Overwhelmingly Positive (95%, 54,262) |
| Critic aggregate | 81/100 | 78/100 |
| Price | $19.99 | $9.99 |
| Install size | 1 GB | — |
| Steam Deck | playable | playable |
| Released | 2017 | 2009 |
| Developer | Monomi Park | Pandemic Studios |
Prices and Steam ratings are read live and move over time.
Slime Rancher vs STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005), point by point
Each facet side by side. A round is marked won only where a figure settles it; feel and "which is better" carry no mark, because no number we hold decides them.
Genre and premise
Slime RancherFPS open-world gameSTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)FPS strategy gameWhat each is filed as. Each game describes itself in full above; we do not judge a premise.
How it plays
Slime RancherCute, Exploration, AdventureSTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)Action, Shooter, ClassicThe tags players apply most, in order of votes. A read on feel, not a verdict.
Reception
Slime Rancher ✓Score 8.6 · 98% on Steam · 81 criticSTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)Score 8.1 · 95% on Steam · 78 criticThe GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment, critics and popularity, computed the same way for every game.
Content and scale
Slime Rancher156,780 reviews · 5 add-ons · 1 GBSTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)54,262 reviewsReach and footprint, not quality: more reviews or a bigger install is not a better game.
Price
Slime Rancher$19.99STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) ✓$9.99Read live from Steam and subject to change.
On a Steam Deck
Slime RancherPlayableSTAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)PlayableValve's own Deck compatibility rating.
Across the rounds a number can settle, it is level at 1 each. Which one is "better" is the part no figure decides, so we leave it to what you want from the two.
The two on the grid
Compare the whole catalogueSlime Rancher and STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) on the axes the GamingPickz Score is built from, on the full 0 to 100 scale so each dot is its real position. Change either axis to compare them on any measure.
2 games have both
Players. The share of Steam reviews marked positive, pulled toward the catalogue average in proportion to how few reviews stand behind it. A game with 200 reviews moves a long way toward the average; one with 200,000 barely moves at all. Without this a title sitting at 100 percent on nine reviews outranks Half-Life 2 at 98 percent on 278,000.
Popularity. A blend of two things that are not the same. Audience is how many people wrote a Steam review, which is a floor on how many played it. Reach is how many language editions of Wikipedia document the game, which is cultural footprint rather than sales. A game can score high on one and low on the other: a huge free-to-play title has audience without reach, and a landmark console exclusive has reach without a Steam audience at all. Where both exist they are averaged; where only one does, that one carries it.
- PC
Every point links to that game's entry. The value map and the reception map are fixed views of the same data.
How positions are decided
No paid placement, no favouritism, live third-party data
- Placed by the published method, not by us. Every coordinate is computed from the axis definitions and weights printed on this site. Nobody moves a point. See the axes.
- Nothing here is paid for. No sponsored placements, no promoted slots, no arrangement of any kind affects a position. If that ever changes it will be labelled and sit outside the ranking.
- No favouritism, including our own. The 16 games we have written full reviews of are scored by exactly the same formula as the other 1,510, from the same third-party inputs, and they land where it puts them. Our own opinion of a game does not enter its coordinates.
- A position is not an endorsement. It says how a game was received and what it costs, not that we recommend it. Where we do recommend something, it carries a written review with a name on it.
- Fetched from live third-party data. Player sentiment from Steam, critic aggregates as published on store pages, prices checked hourly, attention from Wikipedia. Each figure carries its source and the date it was read, and we do not adjust any of them.
Which to pick, by what you want
- The higher-rated of the two: Slime Rancher (GamingPickz Score 8.6)
- The cheaper right now: STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) ($9.99)
- The safer bet by weight of reviews: Slime Rancher (156,780 reviews)
What they have in common
Both are tagged by Steam players with:
AdventureSingleplayerFirst-PersonGreat SoundtrackActionFPS
Where they differ
CuteExplorationOpen WorldColorfulFunnySandbox
MultiplayerShooterClassicThird-Person ShooterSci-fiSpace
Tags players apply to one game and not the other.
Difficulty and who each is for
By the tags players apply, Slime Rancher is relaxed, easy to pick up. STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is middle-of-the-road on difficulty.
System requirements, side by side
| Slime Rancher | STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) | |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum GPU | 512MB | 64MB 3d Graphics card with Vertex Shader and Pixel Shader (VS/PS) Capability |
| Minimum CPU | 2.2GHz Dual Core | Intel Pentium 4 1.5 GHz |
| Minimum RAM | 4 GB | 0.3 GB |
| Install size | 1 GB | — |
Can your PC run them? Check each against your own kit: Slime Rancher · STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005).
Accessibility features
Steam store pages declare 1 accessibility feature for Slime Rancher and 0 for STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005). A declaration is a floor, not a review.
If you like one, also try
Common questions
How different are Slime Rancher and STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) in scope?
Slime Rancher has drawn 156,780 Steam reviews, ships 5 add-ons and installs in 1 GB. STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) has drawn 54,262 Steam reviews.
Is Slime Rancher or STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) better?
By the GamingPickz Score, Slime Rancher rates higher (8.6 to 8.1). That is a composite of player sentiment, the critic aggregate and popularity, not our taste. "Better" also depends on price, length and platform, which the table above lays out.
Which is cheaper, Slime Rancher or STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)?
STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is cheaper right now at $9.99, against $19.99. Prices move, so this is read live from Steam and can change.
Should I get Slime Rancher or STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005)?
Slime Rancher rates higher, 8.6 to 8.1 on the GamingPickz Score, and STAR WARS Battlefront II (Classic, 2005) is the cheaper at $9.99. It also depends on what you want: the "which to pick" section above calls out which is cheaper, lighter on storage, better on a Steam Deck and the safer bet by weight of reviews.
Do you rank one above the other for a fee?
No. Neither game, nor anyone else, pays for placement or a verdict here. The order and every figure come out of the same public data the rest of the site uses.
Related comparisons
How we compare, and what we will not do
The GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment (adjusted for sample size), the critic aggregate and popularity, computed by the same code every ranked list on this site uses. The Steam rating label is Valve's own, reconstructed from the positive percentage and review count. Prices are read live. We do not write an opinion of which game is "better": we report the numbers and say which wins each measurable question above.