Rock, Paper, Shotgun

Why Didn’t Everyone Play Kingdoms Of Amalur?!

By John Walker on February 26th, 2013 at 9:00 pm.

There’s a game you probably didn’t play. It came out last year, it’s a genuine epic, a vast, elaborate RPG with a sprawling story and vast numbers of sidequests. It features superbly in-depth combat, has huge variety in character design and levelling, and lets you instantly wander from the main plot and explore its enormous world to your own entertainment. It’s Kingdoms Of Amalur: Reckoning.

I remember attending a press day in late 2011, looking at a selection of EA games, and Amalur was there. But no one suggested I take a look at. In a quiet moment I snuck onto one of the long row of empty PCs to have a go, found myself intrigued, and then was angrily told to stop by an EA representative. Playing unsupervised, tsk. That was as close as I got.

A week and a half ago I was trying to get onto the SimCity beta weekend, but Origin was falling to pieces, servers down, logins impossible. And I saw Amalur there, downloaded to my PC, on a whim from a while back and never explored. For whatever peculiar reason, the set of EA servers that allowed that game to check in on itself worked, and after some moronic requirement to “authenticate” my PC, two separate EULAs, and yet more logging in, I was able to get to a game menu. I’ve not stopped playing since.

I must have put in a couple of dozen hours in the last week or so. And by the map, I’m maybe just over halfway exploring the world, so halfway through the main story, the three separate faction quests I’ve found so far, and the 60 or so sidequests I’ve completed. I’m so hooked, so completely drawn in to its fantasy world, and I’ve no desire to stop. I’ve little desire to do anything else but keep playing. I want to start to explore why.

It’s also important to note that Amalur is riddled by bugs. Amazingly stupid bugs that in no way should ever have cleared testing. Bugs like the quest screen completely falling to pieces and going blank once you’ve about 20 quests running (something that’s unavoidable). And of course bugs that, now creators 38 Studios and Big Huge Games no longer exist, will never be fixed. Yet despite this, it’s still incredibly robust for a game of its scale, and especially for a game that offers you an extraordinary amount of freedom.

While there’s much to criticise, there’s far more to celebrate. This is a really fantastic game, bursting full of story, combat and exploration, and yet you probably didn’t play it.

Amalur is impressive on a number of levels. The two most important are its distilling of the very best of an action-RPG MMO into a single-player game, and its meta-commentary on the very nature of games. But don’t be put off by either! No, really, don’t! I want to explore those two.

It’s not a surprise that the game should have so many similarities with a game like World Of Warcraft. Of the two teams that made it, 38 Studios and Big Huge Games, the former was already working on an MMO. The doomed developer, with all that money via the deals of baseballist Curt Schilling, had been developing a massive universe along with author R.A. Salvatore, with a 10,000 year history, and all the background needed to create an ongoing, online game. After 38 bought BHG, along with them came not only the Big Huge Engine, but an RPG they’d been working on for THQ. The two, like the studios, were combined. Goodness knows what either might have been, but the combination is a purely single-player RPG with the depth and breadth of an online world.

We’re talking Dragon Age: Origins scale here, but in a far freer, far more open world. While you do eventually navigate its enormous stretches through the map’s quick travel, you could still run anywhere too. It’s all open, all connected, and all packed with so much going on.

The other tempting comparison is Skyrim, and that megalithic RPG having come out just a couple of months before can’t have done sales of Amalur any favours. But it’s definitely an inappropriate comparison. Yes, you can ignore the main plot, yes, you can kill absolutely anyone, anywhere, and still have the game somehow cope, and yes, it has the most stupidly designed inventory menus imaginable. But the atmosphere, the tone, the intangible feel of it all – to compare it feels weirdly wrong. It’s something much brighter, something much more accessible.

That’s hugely helped by its being a third-person action game. Combat is true to that too, relying on some healthy button mashing and frantic dodging. Big fights with giant creatures are chunky, satisfying brawls, as you hammer away at the A button (yes, I picked 360 controls for this, and with the wayward mouse it’s definitely the better option, and the one with which the game was obviously primarily designed to be played), throwing in shield blocks, dodging rolls, and your array of special abilities, spells, and old-school button combo moves.

For me, what’s made this especially special, is it’s the first time I’ve ever bothered to properly engage with a game’s blocking mechanic. Like how most fun action-driving games really never need you to press the brake, most action-combat games never really need you to bother with blocking. There are ways, means, hammering of buttons that generally get around such a faff if you’re as lazy as me. But here it’s so damned rewarding, so absolutely satisfying every time you time it perfectly, that I’m finally converted. I’m actually slowing down for the corners, rather than bumping off the barriers at the side.

But when a game like this has such an emphasis on the combat, invariably that means the RPG side of things is watered down. Action-RPGs, the Diablo-mould creations, tend to have wispy plots, little chats to be had in hub towns, then back to the biffing. But that’s absolutely not the case in Amalur. You could easily spend an entire evening nattering away with the residents of a newly discovered city, exploring the side-streets for those in trouble and needing your help, negotiating with bigwigs, exchanging loot for new equipment, handing in completed quests, discovering secret treasures in dungeons hidden behind a house’s backrooms, stealing all the valuables from everyone’s bedroom drawers, and gathering a new armful of tasks to complete in the surrounding area.

Then off you go, aiming toward quest markers, having spots of combat along the way, until you’re inevitably distracted by an intriguing looking building, or dead body containing some odd clue, or pathway leading to an enclosed area, and so on. That measure by which I test all RPGs for goodnessity – the impossibility of actually going where you intended without getting waylaid – is triumphantly ticked here in a big thick red marker pen.

When I began playing, I realised that I’d started this game once before. I vaguely recognised the opening moments – being dead and wheeled in a cart to a heap of other deads, interwoven with the character creation. Then waking up, alive again, and escaping the odd place you’re in. I recalled the stuff about Fateweaving, about how Fateweavers determine the fixed paths of our futures based on the magical nature of Fate, but that I had no path, that I was different. I remembered the opening village, the dying blue woman on the ground, and then I must have been distracted by a bee in a jaunty hat, because there my recollection ended. But perhaps because I’d seen this village previously, rather than focusing on the stories being set up there, I charged off up a hill toward a pretty looking stone. And from there across some fields, until I discovered another blue character – one the Fae (basically, elves) – who asked me to do a thing that directed me, in stages, toward the Elv- Fae city. I ended up getting embroiled in their story, rather than the main plot, for a long time.

The Fae are immortal. Sort of. They die, sort of routinely, but then come back to life and repeat their cycles. The Cycle, in fact, is the key to Fae culture. Because they are their own history (although that gets complicated too), they retell the same existences as stories, endlessly looping their reality, their lives being the folktales they tell. That’s just brilliant. And it’s the first part of this game’s commentary on the nature of storytelling, and the invasion of a player. Because things aren’t following the correct patterns. The cycles aren’t looping, and baddie Faes are taking advantage of this, manipulating the changes to see themselves come to power. The endless battle between the Winter and Summer courts of the Fae are beginning to change their determined outcomes, the Winter Fae starting to win where they should lose. And it seems to have a lot to do with you, and why you don’t obey the rules of Fate.

It’s not just the Fae this applies to. They have a broader perspective of the other races, especially the humans, nicknamed by Fae as “dustlings”. Their lives too are pre-determined, although they may live in denial of this. Because they’re all NPCs, right? Gettit? And yes, in my just stating it in some words it may seem a little trite, but the game doesn’t spell it out so obviously. There’s no elbow-nudging. Instead it’s just a lovely, underwritten acknowledgement of the nature of the player, the person who comes in and changes the inevitability of the course of all their lives.

Which might usually be something that’s rather undermined by the game’s inevitably being linear. Yet Amalur gets away with this too. Yes, it says, this is a linear path. You are on this route, this is your destiny, and that’s the nature of life. Except as you travel this path, the outcomes of your actions are not fixed. That’s true in the decisions you might make in a minor sidequest, whether to help him, or her, and the small-scale consequences of that. And it’s true in what the game calls Twists Of Fate – key points in which you (not knowing they’re key points, crucially) make a decision that dramatically changes the course of history.

I, for instance, am now ruler of the House Of Ballads, one of the highest positions in Fae kind. And I’m not Fae! What manner of madness! Also, my defiant Atheism (I’m roleyplaying!) has led to my being declared an Unwritten One, further determining my own future. (Although I’ve somewhat undermined that by pretending to become a follower of Lyria because I wanted the XP – elsewhere in the game I’ve been given the conversation option of lying when it comes to such matters, this time it didn’t.)

I don’t yet know how far this commentary will reach, or whether it will fade aside to let the more generic fantasy tropes that permeate all come fully to the front. Because in honesty, for most of the time, for the ten thousandth time you’re looking for the ten thousandth person reported missing after they wandered off into Deadlytraps Dungeon or the like. Most of the time it’s political machinations between pretend clans of people you didn’t know existed last week, and so are hard-pushed to care too much about now. In fact, and perhaps super-meta-archly-appositely, I more often find myself siding with whomever I think will lead to a more interesting outcome. Were they planning that? I don’t think they were planning that. But still, it’s happening.

Also, I SO love the woodpecker-like sound it makes when your magically restoring quiver of arrows refills.

I have so much to say about this game. I’m very aware that this is madness, extensively writing about a game that came out a year ago that everyone ignored, from a studio that no longer exists. But dammit, if I can convince a handful of people to pick up a copy, then I’ll be happy. I want to talk about how it embodies everything that’s great about the RPG, as well as how it embodies everything that’s completely ridiculous. So next time, how I accidentally killed the entire population of a monastery.

__________________

« | »

, , , , , .

355 Comments »

  1. monkeybars says:

    Because the demo was bad and it’s still $60 on Steam.

    • RichardDastardly says:

      This. AND it came 2 months after Skyrim. Stupid mistake.

      • Phantoon says:

        Combat was better than Skyrim’s, though.

        • President Weasel says:

          And it has a pretty stupid name, Colon of Colons: The Coloning. It’s the first game in the series (the series that won’t happen now), just call it something.
          Also there wasn’t much of a PR push, and Skyrim was out as has been said.

          • Gnoupi says:

            “The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim”

          • Ultra Superior says:

            Skyrim hides its colonostomy well.

          • Davie says:

            With Skyrim it’s [Series] [number]: [Title] which is completely reasonable. You learn the name of the game and that there are ostensibly four others like it. When it’s a single game that has yet to be part of a wider setting or franchise, colons and subtitles just look silly.

          • Bhazor says:

            I think the real problem with the name is that no one knows how to spell it. Obviously that becomes a problem when you’re searching for it online.

            I for example always wrote it as Amarula.

          • SuperNashwanPower says:

            Think yourself lucky. I got King Dong and A Male Ewe.

            Which isn’t even biologically correct, let alone morally.

          • AdmiralFrosty says:

            I’ll be honest, the name didn’t pass my garbage filters until weeks after it released and people talked about it. It sounds so freaking generic that I never even thought about it.

          • sinister agent says:

            The title is certainly a huge negative. I honestly didn’t know whether I’d played it or not when I read the title of this, and had to search my PC and inbox to check it. I’ve bought or read about at least 10 other games I will probably continue to confuse it with.

            I’d probably have given it a look back in 2011, but I can’t really justify it now.

          • LintMan says:

            @AdmiralFrosty – yeah, the generic title basically camoflaged this game from me for a long time; even after I read a few positive reviews and comments I kept forgetting what it was.

            It eventually sunk in enough that I thought to pick it up if I saw it on sale, but soon afterwards 38 Studio imploded and I decided to give it a pass.

          • HadToLogin says:

            To burst your bubble: game called “The Elder Scrolls” doesn’t exist. There’s Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, but there never was anything just called “TES”.
            Looks like they wanted to mimic Bethesda’s in naming too.

          • remote says:

            Skyrim, yeah, sure. There was also Dark Souls, and when I already thought, “What appeal does Skyrim really have for me when Dark Souls is so clearly superior,” of course there was no reason for me to even consider playing Amalur. And I still play Dark Souls all the time.

        • Zelos says:

          And so was the story, and the world, and the quests, and the graphics.

          Pretty much everything really.

          New IPs can’t compete with major titles like that, regardless of the quality of either.

          • Snargelfargen says:

            I think a new IP needs to distinguish itself to at least have a chance. Apart from the MMO trappings what makes Amalur stand out? Genuinely curious here. The bit about the fae does seem interesting but I only saw that mentioned in reviews after the game’s release.

            It was as if the marketing campaign put more effort into talking up potential sequels than they did elaborating on the strengths of the game.

          • Ultra Superior says:

            EDIT: Snargelfargen beat me.

            I disagree completely. New IPs can compete, they just need to present something new, focused and appealing.

            Trying to please the gods of mainstream with kingdom of genericness, offering the same elves and horned ancient evil, just doesn’t work.

          • PopeRatzo says:

            Of course new IPs can compete. They just have to be special. And while Amalur was really good, it wasn’t all that special at a time when people were playing Arkham City and a bunch of other standout games. Amalur was not that different from say, Darksiders II. It’s a bunch of sword-y clobberin’ with elves and stuff. Climbing around on ruins. Third person. With a goddamn controller.

            Couple of years ago Bioshock was a “new IP”, after all and it did pretty well.

            I played the hell out of Amalur. I enjoyed it. Didn’t finish it. But I didn’t get to it until other greater games were out of the way.

            I hope we reach a point where there are too many great games for one person to play them all unless you are a very committed, very unemployed gamer.

          • Triplanetary says:

            But if you’re unemployed how can you afford all the games?

          • lociash says:

            >Why did no one play KoA

            Because it was so unbelievably dull, I purchased it completely drawn in by the premise of RA Salvatore creating the mythos/world having loved the Drizzt books and looking for a new RPG having playing multitudes of them.

            But what I got was dull, uninspired and playing to cliché in the worst ways. Sure the combat was more interesting than a number of similar games, but it was also exceptionally easy even on harder difficulty levels throw in a MMO style quest grind system and what I ended up with was a terrible case of buyers remorse.

          • Snargelfargen says:

            @ Iociash
            I’m afraid it’s been a while since Salvatore has done anything decent, so seeing his name attached isn’t necessarily a good thing. The Sellsword trilogy was all right though.

          • Kestilla says:

            Snargel you are so right. Sellswords, sure. Drizzt? I’ve read a lot of Drizzt books, but damnit are they cliche, and the cast of supporting characters are awful. You know you have a problem as the creator of dozens of characters when on the same page, each of them starts using the same catchphrases you have bouncing around in your own head.

            I played the demo of this game and was extremely unimpressed. I was bored almost instantly, and after entering the second, snaking cave/tunnel with no light at the end, facing another mind-numbing fight against who cares enemy number five, in this extremely general fantasy land that had failed to grip me at all, I just turned it off. I expect a lot more from my supposedly open world fantasy games these days, and Amalur felt very restrictive and underwhelming.

        • Max.I.Candy says:

          “Combat was better than Skyrim’s, though.”

          …..not excactly a hard thing to do.
          Its one of the things that kept me playing so long…that and the upgrading and skills and crafting and whatnot. All in all I prefer Amalur a bazillion times more then Skyrim.

          • socrate says:

            amalure when i “tried it” was extremely WoWish and other then the combat it didin’t offer something really worth talking about it was pretty much a straight line and the balancing on creature and AI made the combat system pretty much useless…i think people tend to remember game in a better version then they usually are…happen ALOTS…i have friend that still glorify EQ each year and this year i actually made them play it….they went back to WoW after 1 week…../rolleye

            amalur as pretty much only combat going for it….i don’t even think it compete with TES series since TES is really free roaming while amalur sure you can go forward and back and sometime even left or right but it always end up going forward in the end.

            The fact that its so freaking costy doesn’t help at all and EA tend to be stupid in terms of money.

            In the end Kingdom of Amalur ended up being a single player watered down(if that is even possible at this point) World of Warcraft….and if im gonna get that id rather just go play WoW instead.

      • Danarchist says:

        I think the buggy demo, a poorly timed release date, and just general bad word of mouth from people on forums that had never actually played the game (I saw my first negative thread about the game before the demo even came out) pretty much did a third trimester abortion. I received it as a gift from one of my friends and didn’t play it till I finished Skyrim. Overall I really prefer the combat and story of Amalur. I have sank more hours into Skyrim thanks to mods, but only by about 15hours. I have no idea why it was so negatively received, but I have played the living crap out of it and not gotten all the way through the game yet.
        The combat can get samey unless you respec once in awhile to use different abilities, but I mean, my stabby stabby sword guy has been an archer and mage too.
        That’s without restarting, you can respec everything for a chunk of cash and completely change how you play on the fly.

    • dE says:

      I concur. To both statements.
      To further expand upon that:

      The demo was having control issues, there was a constant lag to everything I did. Input, wait a second, output. What I played was fair enough, but seeing DLC pile up already and given that it didn’t really grab my attention big time, I ended up putting it on my watchlist: It’s good enough a game for me, but not great enough to warrant full price.
      Then, that origin thing. For reasons that are entirely my own, I will not use Origin. However, the only pricedrops I’ve ever seen were either by Origin or through retailers for Origin. I might grab it for the Toybox though. But there’s a big enough list of games for that, I’ll buy prior to that.

      So the combination of those two things means I won’t be playing it anytime soon.

      • Archonsod says:

        It’s been on sale on Steam about twenty times in the past year.

        • qrter says:

          Maybe it’s a mainland Europe thing..? Because I haven’t seen it go on sale even once, not in one of the large sales, nor in a daily deal.

          • dE says:

            Yeah. Maybe.
            I just double-checked with several price history things (well the two popular ones). It’s listed as having been on sale once, with a pricedrop of 25% for a weekend. That’s the only instance of a steamsale of this game I can find.

          • Delixe says:

            It was on sale on the Origin EU store recently for €5 along with a load of other titles like Crysis 2. Of course the only problem with Origin is the DLC never, ever seems to go on sale.

          • Baines says:

            I’ve read before that due to the bankruptcy of 38 Studios, Steam cannot reduce Amalur’s price. Other sites made different arrangements, and are not restricted the same way.

            If what I read was true, Steam made their arrangement directly with 38 Studios, while other sites made deals with I guess EA? Or maybe it was Big Huge.

          • HadToLogin says:

            Rumour says Amazon is nearly finished with negotiations about being able to sell Steam Keys (I know they started them, there was no word about them failing). And they sold bundle – game and DLCs.

        • monkeybars says:

          According to this: steamprices.com/us/app/102500/kingdoms-of-amalur-reckoning it’s been on sale once, for three days in April, for $40.

        • Patches the Hyena says:

          That’s just wrong. I can only remember one sale, for 25% off. It never went on sale during the Summer or Winter Sales, which is a shame because it could’ve sold quite the bundle.

        • scottossington says:

          Gamersgate has it on sale all the time

          • qrter says:

            I’d guess you live in the UK – Gamersgate very regularly has EA deals for the UK that don’t apply to the rest of Europe.

          • HadToLogin says:

            But not Steam version. And most PC gamers are Steam-fanboys.

          • Apocalypse says:

            Origin keys I bet.
            Most PC gamer are origin hate-boys.

            Me included, it must not be steam, I am really happy with DRM-Free humble bundles, honestly, I enjoyed impulse while it was still run by Stardock. , I am fine with uplay if there is no always-on-DRM. I am not fine with Origin.
            The only way I could become ever fine with origin would be if they start selling DRM-free. I do not trust EA after they have kicked me in the nuts countless of times already.

    • Feferuco says:

      The demo was 2 hours of playing a version almost entirely like the full version, however you liked and almost as far as you wanted to, that was a good demo to me.

      Better than playing a segment of the game that the devs think is the most awesome with a bunch of skills and weapons that wouldn’t actually have.

      • monkeybars says:

        I meant that the demo ran like crap and played poorly. I had to turn off features so my screen wouldn’t be completely black the entire time. I didn’t have a problem with the content that was presented.

        • mabnvw646 says:

          He is moving the gun and head separately from each other. In that version of the mod he controls the “body” with a gamepad and the camera by looking around.
          Check out his Half-Life 2 video where he use a separate tracker taped to a plastic gun for aiming (and walking with the analogue stick on the gun controller).

          Edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5H2rL-lBxRs

    • Convolvulus says:

      Yes, bad demo + price kept me away. The console demo I tried was buggy and looked awful; I don’t trust EA, so I couldn’t go with their PC version; and I couldn’t get it from Steam because the state of Rhode Island still hasn’t dropped the price. Now that the devs are gone, I can’t buy a console copy because it’ll never be fixed, so I’m just waiting to see if the Steam version ever goes on sale.

      Also, Bethesda had a 33% Skyrim discount on the day that Amalur released, and I had a “25% off Skyrim” coupon from Valve that was about to expire. So Amalur was the furthest thing from my mind for a while.

    • TomxJ says:

      Same. Jumped on the demo asap, was dissapointed.

      • SeismicRend says:

        KOA:R is a good example of one of the many ways demos hurt sales. 38 Studios outsourced the demo and it had technical flaws that the full game did not which lost them a lot of potential sales.

    • Teovald says:

      From times to times, I check the price of Amalur on Steam, see that it is still the full retail price , shake my head and exit the page..
      Does anybody know a way to buy Amalur and all its addon at a reasonable price and get steam keys (I don’t think it is on GOG) ?

      • AraxisHT says:

        The only place to get a Steam key is on Steam. In fact, I think Steam is the only place to get an Origin-free copy.

        • HadToLogin says:

          I think Steam still have Origin copy, but in a same way Dragon Age or Alice are Origin games – you need Origin account to login into game.

        • Teovald says:

          Origin only ? That may be another reason for the irrelevance of Amalur … Not a lot of people are going to subscribe to a new service in order to play to an unknown game.
          Even when a good like Arkham City forces me to subscribe to a new service (and in that case a buggy one that will randomly delete my savegames), it makes me regret my purchase…

    • aliksy says:

      Yep. Tried the demo, wasn’t that impressed. Combat was … I don’t remember, so it couldn’ve been that good. Skill progression looked awful. Stealth stunk. Interface wasn’t very good. Races felt like a bad D&D homebrew.

      But despite all of that, I haven’t seen it on Steam for < $7.50. I'd probably try it again for $5.

    • GoliathBro says:

      Yup, I got the demo, and thought it was absolutely trash. The combat looked interesting, but I also had the one second delay problem which was really weird, and the environment in the demo to me felt extremely limited and invisible wally.

      Might give it a second go now, though.

    • Jumwa says:

      Same. The demo did not impress in any manner and the game has never gone on any noteworthy sale.

      When other top tier year old games are selling for $5-10 I can’t bring myself to spend six times that. Not when I have a massive catalogue other titles to play.

      • Zelos says:

        Name one $60 game from a year ago that is selling for $5-10.

        (You can’t because there aren’t any)

        • GoliathBro says:

          I actually bought this with a bunch of DLC (or was it an expansion pack?) in an Amazon sale for $12, albeit I havent installed it since.

        • db1331 says:

          I passed on Sleeping Dogs for around $5 on Steam a couple months ago. I simply have too big of a backlog.

        • Jumwa says:

          A couple examples off the top of my head: I got Human Revolution last year for $5. Got two copies of F.E.A.R 3 last summer for less than ten.

          Haven’t bought anything in the past few months however, since I’ve been overrun with work.

          • Phinor says:

            To be fair, the first time F.E.A.R. 3 dropped down to $4.99 in Steam was over a year after the release. The first time Deus Ex: Human Revolution dropped to $4.99 in Steam was also well over a year after release.

            Anyway Amalur will likely never drop down in price in Steam because the publishing company no longer exists. There’s a sliver of hope that Amazon’s magnificent Tony actually succeeds in acquiring keys that activate on Steam but that’s about it.

            Now all of the above is void if you accept stores other than Steam. I know F.E.A.R. 3 and DXHR both activate on Steam but it’s not a fair comparison, because Amalur Origin copies have been available for peanuts elsewhere as well.

          • Jumwa says:

            I never bought them on Steam.

            These days with digital games competition so high, I find Steam is usually beat out by places like Greenman Gaming, Gamersgate, or GetGames.

        • Mrs Columbo says:

          I bought the excellent Max Payne 3 in the pre-xmas sale for £6, I seem to recall.

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            Man you’re lucky.
            I bought Max Payne 3 but it wasn’t the excellent one, it was the interactive movie one

    • db1331 says:

      This is all there is to it. I remember while I was playing the demo on Steam a buddy messaged me and asked “How is it?” I said, “It’s not a $60 game.” In my opinion, it should have been $40 at release. You can’t put out something like that right around Skyrim and ask the same price for it.

      • mattevansc3 says:

        Why not? It’s better than Skyrim.

        • Sparkasaurusmex says:

          Doesn’t matter. Check this out- skyrim sells millions… KoA killed it’s developer.
          Shouldn’t have released it at $60 when Skyrim came out. It failed. Doesn’t matter if it’s better (it’s not) it failed partly because of this.
          And yeah, it failed. No one plays it and those that did are commenting here and mostly hated it.

    • Bob says:

      Yeah, I didn’t like the demo. It took ten minutes to work out I had to hit “Enter” to exit…I can’t recall what.

      A couple of Steam buddies played the full version and seemed to enjoy it. They enjoy a few games I don’t so I gave it a miss anyway just on the demo’s “evidence”.

    • benkc says:

      More or less. I actually felt the demo was rather well-done: IIRC, a 90-minute timed demo, but the timer only started after you finished the tutorial section and paused any time you were faffing about in menus or dialog or cutscenes, and more content then you would likely get to in those 90 minutes.

      But… it all felt a bit too… MMO-ey? I can’t recall exactly what I didn’t like about it, but I clearly remember that my decision was to wait until it dropped to at least $20 in a sale. And, AFAIK, it has never gone on sale. (Edit: Reading the rest of the comments, apparently it has gone on decent sales a few times, just never on Steam.)

      Edit again: Wait, does it require Origin even if you buy it elsewhere? (Some of the comments seem to indicate that. I hadn’t realized that.)

      • HadToLogin says:

        Don’t know for sure (since I don’t have it), but knowing EA I’m guessing it require Origin account in a same way Dragon Age or Alice requires them, not actual software.

    • sonofcaine says:

      True. I honestly was willing to buy it but the demo killed it for me.

    • KrisuTeam says:

      For those who are interested in getting the game and not hung up on getting it on Steam, here are some places selling the Origin-version of the game for under $30: http://www.cheapshark.com/search?q=amalur

    • Loyal_Viggo says:

      It’s only 10 quid ($15) in the UK on Amazon.co.uk

    • Lemming says:

      Bad demo
      Stupid Title
      Origin required
      Too expensive
      Image problem of appearing a generic fantasy RPG.

      All of the above.

  2. Phantoon says:

    Because it was an MMO without other people.

    Actually, I did play it. But it was an MMO without other people.

    • BTAxis says:

      Thing is, I would consider that a good thing. The reason why I don’t play MMOs is the other people.

      However, Amalur has other problems, chief among which is its lack of change as the game goes on. It’s a long game, and it gets really samey rather quickly. I enjoyed it for the time I played it, but I didn’t beat it.

      • Phantoon says:

        That’s what I meant.

        MMOs are basically all very samey. It’s a game type as well as a structure. Like Planetside 2 is referred to as an MMOFPS, because it’s not click button make thing happen. Unless you’re a Vanu sniper, then I guess it is click button make thing happen.

      • MrMud says:

        No, thats not good. MMO’s are all about padding content with meaningless and dull tasks. Unfortunately Amalur was the same.

    • Lobotomist says:

      Exactly.
      John, if you played the game for 10+ hours you will easily figure it out.

      It was simply MMO without other people. Like if you would take some fake WOW server and just play it with population 0.

      There are reasons why MMOs have certain gameplay. And its certanly not because that gameplay makes sense in single player game. This is what Amalur failed to understand.

      Its a very simple reason why it failed.

      • John Walker says:

        But that simply isn’t true. And I’ve played the game for around 25 hours, maybe more. The dialogue, the non-combat, and the changing the direction of the story have little in common with most MMOs. It’s ridiculous to dismiss all that makes it an RPG, unless you’re going to retrospectively include a lot of pre-MMO RPGs too.

        • Snargelfargen says:

          The Gothic series actually has quite a lot in common with MMO mechanics. I think the two genres (action-rpg and mmo) have often drawn inspiration from each other over the years.

          So I guess its a fair comparison, although the same gameplay mechanics often serve a different purpose in single-player.

        • Feriluce says:

          Really is a single player mmo though. You start playing, get intrigued by the combat, but after a few hours, you realize that all you’re doing is very basic questing, and that you’re actually very, very bored. That is the point where you stop playing and never pick it up again.

          It was just a resounding “…meh?”.

          • mouton says:

            Reminds me of Borderlands 1/2. The worst case of mind-numbing questing I have experienced in a long while.

        • lethial says:

          I really enjoyed the game and have the super collector’s edition. It really is a shame that the game faded into oblivion, since there are really a lot of details that John has pointed out.

          I do have a question for you though John. Have you gotten “The great general” quest yet? I encountered a game breaking bug there and didn’t have a save file that didn’t have the script for that quest be broken as well.

          Sigh, maybe one day someone will hack it or something to fix this bug. :(

        • Dana says:

          The whole structure reeked of MMO. The pack of mobs, the quest hubs (and hub to hub pacing) the fact that doing normal questing I overleveled hard, and by the second big zone I was killing mobs in seconds. The shallow, pretending to be deep class system.

          I actually liked the demo, I liked the game as well, for the first 4-5 hours. Then it killed me with boredom.

        • AraxisHT says:

          I played quite a bit of the game (though I was also late to the party). It didn’t feel anything like an MMO to me. It had many standard elements of the RPG genre, but none of the problems I find with MMOs.

          It had a strong story, strong characters, strong combat, strong visuals, and choices that felt like they mattered enough for me to reload old saves to change my choice. ( I also didn’t encounter many bugs.)

          My favorite part so far was the House Of Ballads questline.

        • Max.I.Candy says:

          I actually agree with Walker on something! The end times are here!
          This is in no way just an MMO without other ppl….thats ridiculous. You could say the same for plenty of other games of the rpg/ hack and slash genre. You’re missing all the good things the game does right, and Skyrim fails at.

        • fooga44 says:

          I’m sorry John but you suck at judging game quality. Amalur’s combat pacing was awful, and the quests were boring as fuck. When you have an action oriented combat system you want to keep the player interested with lots of interesting fast paced combat. Problem was Amalurs combat wasn’t up to snuff and the quests were mostly boring.

          It was just an average to mediocre game all around, if it was made more like God of war where had a smaller set of setpiece levels Amalur could have been good. The problem was they didn’t have the resources to make an open ended game WHILE keeping the pacing of the game going without huge amounts of dead time.

          The combat in amalur got boring quick because it was just too easy and wasn’t very action oriented, you never felt any real tension because of the ‘easy mode’ mmo spaced monsters. I had the same problem with darksiders 2 and how monsters were spaced on the overworld like in an MMO.

          Modern games have unlearned so many gameplay lessons as they’ve dumbed them down for morons with no reflexes.

        • LostInDaJungle says:

          Meh… I bought it and put 10ish hours into it.

          I played the thiefy type, and found that I spent 90% of the time doing the dash move through people. So combat got boring quick.

          And that brings me to the big glaring problem with Amalur… R.A. Salvatore. Seelie Fae, Gwastl Brad, Castle Gastyr, “Ljosalfar” (?!?), etc… A thick helping of unpronounceable words, a skill/crafting/fate system that was overly complex, and a leveling system that guaranteed that you had to grind, but not too much or each area would be either impossible or trivial. Fetch quests that made you spend more time in the overland map than in actual game play.

          A decent overall story that got destroyed by having all of the little side quests. I never felt any sense of urgency, and half the time by the time I had progressed to the next stage of a quest, I had forgotten who was who, and why I should care. It was too big, and as a result didn’t offer a very focused narrative. It was like reading a good book only to stop after every chapter to read a magazine on stamp collecting. Eventually, the stamp collecting got boring enough and the good book lost it’s immersion enough that I started doing something else. (I think it was Sleeping Dogs) Even the side quests had to be kinda done in order due to the leveling system.

      • Reapy says:

        There was a very good after action report on the disaster that was 38 studios. From the article I believe kingdom was supposed to be a mmo, but not realizing the undertaking and money it would take to bear it to fruition it had to go single player first. I also believe the code was so messed up that (maybe I’m thinking of another game though…) they had to outsource it to another company who took the game home and made it reasonably playable, which is why you have an ambitions, but buggy game.

        The end moral of article was you cant be all ‘we’ll make it work *fist pump* YEAH! It’ll work itself out!!!”, probably coming from a guy who is used to working with a set of people that are at the pinnacle of their sport, motivated and pre selected by million dollar scouting and training systems. With those people you probably just do need to motivate them right, and you get a reset every game.

        With a bad start though, no amount of talent and motivation can unfuck a bad design in a reasonable time.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      And yet is was still better than Skyrim, by a huge margin.

      • Outsider says:

        I’ve got over 600 hours in Skyrim and 0 in this. My opinion obviously differs.

        • SkittleDiddler says:

          Well, obviously.

        • Xardas Kane says:

          I’ve got 200 hours in Skyrim, 25 in this. So yeah, agreed.

        • Fanbuoy says:

          Well, if you haven’t played Amalur, your opinion on it is entirely irrelevant.

        • elevown says:

          LOL- was that meant to be a meaningful argument? I mean, are you realy THAT dumb?

          You do NOT get to have a valid oppinion on something you have, by your own admission, ZERO experience of!

          What you get to say is – I loved skyrim and played it 600hrs- I cant comment on how good Amalur is though, because I’ve never played it!.

          Try engaging your brain, if you’ve got one, before typing next time.

          • Xardas Kane says:

            OK, what about me?

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            Right… and the vast majority of gamers who tried Amalur and found it awful?
            Personally both Skyrim and Amalur are about the same to me. Quite empty experiences that seem to lack ‘character’ or “soul.”

      • Morph says:

        Hahaha! Oh wait…. you’re serious.

        • SkittleDiddler says:

          Yes, I am serious. Anyone who’s familiar with my rambling posts here at RPS knows how much I dislike Skyrim. What’s ironic is that I dislike it for all the reasons people are complaining about KoA:R for. Go figure.

        • mattevansc3 says:

          Amular has better combat, actual RPG elements, fewer bugs on release, an actual storyline, decent crafting and does not have one of the worst skill trees in gaming, so yeah, I think he’s being serious.

      • AraxisHT says:

        I like Skyrim, but Kingdoms of Amalur is a much better RPG than Skyrim is. It actually has characters and story and stuff that are more than just exploring (though it has that too).

        • Jason Moyer says:

          That’s interesting because a.) I found Amalur’s lore/people/places/etc to be totally uninteresting alphabet soup and the most generic high fantasy imaginable and b.) Morrowind, of all things, was the game that made me start appreciating quasi-medieval RPG’s for the first time in years (well, that and Arx) mostly because the Elder Scrolls lore was so amazing and weird.

    • Zeewolf says:

      Yeah. I played it for, I don’t know, ten or so hours. There was tons of stuff to find and do, always rewarding me with some bonus here or there (so very addictive then), but everything felt so meaningless and empty. I never cared about the world or the people, and in the end I just stopped playing and haven’t looked back since.

      • Jason Moyer says:

        Same here. Put in about 15 hours, never once gave a crap about any of the characters or locations. Around that point I had finally hit a new area that didn’t look the same as everywhere I had been, but I couldn’t deal with it anymore by that point. It was like grinding through an MMO that just happened to have decent, if easy, combat.

  3. RaytraceRat says:

    Fun combat, but the game felt like MMO turned into single player. Huge empty locations, fetch quests everywhere and got very repetitive.

    • HexagonalBolts says:

      Exactly this – it had gigantic locations but no life to it whatsoever, it felt like a gigantic cardboard cut out with pastiche characters, locations and enemies.

      (p.s. how are you raytrace? :) )

  4. wu wei says:

    I really enjoyed Amalur. Paid full price at launch and never regretted it. The Fae & their life-as-stories was definitely my favourite part.

    However, it has the problem many of these games do in that if you follow too many side-quests, you end up wildly over-levelled and overpowered. Despite many requests from players for better balancing or areas with actual challenge, the first DLC release was the usual “build your own home” crap which seemed more focused on quick-and-easy cash returns than offering something their fans genuinely wanted.

    • CameO73 says:

      Exactly! I had to stop myself from doing too many sidequests, since the combat was getting way too easy (and as a result very boring). Which lead inevitably to me abandoning the game. Maybe I’ll start a new game some day and pick only a couple of sidequests …

    • Sheng-ji says:

      Me too – bought it on release or shortly after because I enjoyed the demo, had a blast with it. Logged 53 hours with it and was disappointed when the studio went under. I really dislike the current trend to dismiss anything which didn’t have a huge marketing campaign as has been cited above as a reason why people didn’t buy it. Aren’t we supposed to be the core gamers, uninterested in the flashy videos and inevitable bad (not) dubstep, but seek out those hidden gems which offer a bit of fun?

      Also not keen on the current trend of such heavy and damning criticism of storylines or fictional worlds. Seems to be the in thing. A bad story hardly ever stops a game being fun.

    • nearly says:

      given the studio’s rapid demise, i’d say the cash-money DLC was an important step, even if not ideal.

    • JakobBloch says:

      I enjoyed it as well. I am pretty sure I explored every out of the way dungeon, house and story and about 2/3 through I was max level, had gear so good I did not get better from… anything (crafting in the game made this possible, a problem a lot of games have -> Skyrim). That however was secondary to the richness of the world and how interesting the different parts were. The different gods, the fateweavers, the elves, the different humans and their views not to mention the enemies. And that is not even counting the fae the story of which is so fantastic it boggles the mind (I draw parallels with the old pen and paper rpg Changeling from WhiteWolf but I don’t know where the ideas came from originally).

      I simply loved the fae. Where elves are somewhat relatable in other games. The fae are inhuman in so many ways. At the start one thinks they are immortal but you find out they are not. They take on the roles of each other and as one passes away to the cycle another takes the place an becomes the role. The dead fae is then reborn as its opposite (summer to winter and back again) to take the role of another fae. They are truly unique to the fantasy genre we see in games.

      UH and the gnomes they are fantastic too. I won’t go into the nitty gritty but let it suffice to say that they have their own place in the world and their society has some of the murkiest and most robust political games ever.

      The combat is an entire area to itself. It is quick, slick and well put together. There are comboes, tricks, builds and change. The combat really makes you feel like a badass no matter what path you choose. Unfortunately it becomes overwhelmed by how easy it ends up being. Only at the very end when the game catches up with your level do you get a bit of a challenge… but only a bit. It is sad really as this game would have offered so much more with a few more difficulty levels. And this is where the game looses out. The structure is there but… it gets boringly easy.

      So in summary: Fantastic world populated with interesting creatures and people and excellent mechanics and great combat. unfortunately gets boring as you outlevel the content and even when you don’t outlevel it, it is too easy.

      • Enkinan says:

        This pretty much nails it on the head for me, though I never quite knew what made me quit playing it. The game really has so much potential, but something is just not there.

  5. Roxton says:

    I did play it, but I stopped very quickly. This is partly because the demo was terrible, and partly because the camera angle was fixed, and pointed slightly downwards while very, very close to the character. I couldn’t see a thing and had no spatial awareness at all. It made me feel almost claustrophobic.

    Here’s a review I wrote at the time which lists my issues in rather more detail.

    http://cogsandink.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/kingdoms-of-amalur-reckoning-demo.html

  6. Nicholas Totton says:

    I bought the game but I gave up a few hours in. I hated the combats repetition, the leveling progression never felt interesting or rewarding to rank up in, the world looked uninteresting, none of the characters or missions I went on or found were of any interest, and I really hated the elf guys. They just screamed boring and generic. The whole thing was a let down as I really enjoyed the intro set up. It was neat. I kept trying to fight through the game in hopes of finding a hook to grab me, but I just couldn’t fight through all the above mentioned to get to it.

  7. Cruyelo says:

    I’m not sure I would say that “no one played/talked about it”. It did sell over a million copies during its first 3 months and a LOT of people did talk about it.
    The studio did close down, but that had more to do with wasting huge amounts of money, not a lack of attention (or sales).

    Personally I tried the game, felt it had some potential, but got bored by the quests. It felt like fast-food RPG.
    Open world, lots of quests, most of it generic.

    Good enough to make me wish the developers could make a new game, one where they actually knew what they wanted to make instead of changing their mind. Not good enough to make me keep going once I saw what the rest of the game would be like.

  8. jealouspirate says:

    I bought it and stopped playing after a few hours. It was all just very bland to me. Magical forests and Elves.

  9. Coriolis says:

    I also played it. Combat more boring then an MMO, far too many pointless side quests. It feels very good initially, but then it gets bad.

    • Magnusm1 says:

      I don’t know where it failed, but it wasn’t the combat.

      • fooga44 says:

        There were subtle aspects of the combat that sucked because of the open world nature of the game. The combat had action oriented game mechanics but did not have action oriented level design, it had mmo monster mobs that just sit until you aggro.

        Also the speed at which combat resolved needed a bit of speeding up, sword swings and movement in combat needed a speed boost otherwise you don’t kill enemies fast enough and it starts to feel grindy because most enemies have no real challenge or attack patterns. It’s just ‘whack-a-mole’.

    • GameCat says:

      You just described Skyrim, you know?

    • Max.I.Candy says:

      combat worse then mmo?….lolwut?. you’re an idiot

  10. Ultra Superior says:

    Um… I genuinely wanted to enjoy that game but… gosh the story was such a shitake

  11. PearlChoco says:

    I loved the game. And I though the lore was really interesting, more than any other game in its genre. And there was a LOT of it,

  12. X_kot says:

    You know, I dearly love Alpha Protocol in spite of its mechanical clunkiness and clumsy ending, so I can appreciate it when someone assumes the mantle of the iconoclast to wrest a flawed pearl from the mouths of swine. The neat story bits weren’t compelling enough for me to endure the oversized areas and dull loot system, but I think it has enough niche appeal to stick around. Can’t say the same for Colonial Marines, eh?

  13. povu says:

    Do you think the state of Rhode Island will put the game on sale at some point?

    • Ignorant Texan says:

      GamersGate had it on sale for somewhere around $20 last week, around $28 with the DLC(AmazonUS has also had it on sale a few times). Since it was part of an EA catalog sale, I kept hoping it would drop to about half that, but it didn’t. If John’s gushing had appeared then, I would have bought it. Somehow, the timing seems to encapsulate how things just went side-ways for the game and the developers. Oh, and put me down as to someone who found the demo, well, meh. Plus Curt Shilling(Ayn Rand devotee who railed against Guv’ment’s incompetence in investment in industry, then went on to prove his point), R.A. Salavatore, and Todd McFarlane.

      • Sparkasaurusmex says:

        Aha ! I should have known this game was designed by a professional athlete.
        Seriously it reminds me of a bad team trying to buy a pennant by hiring a bunch of washed up used-to-be-great old dudes. …then failing miserably.

  14. Skabooga says:

    Wow, Kingdoms of Amalur is certainly up there on the list of subjects I did not expect to see an article about today on RPS. I love this site!

  15. Gargenville says:

    I immediately disregarded it because all the screenshots looked like Fable crossed with WoW.

    Probably massively unfair but you have to filter which of the three million games launching at any given moment to pay attention to somehow, and barring peer pressure it usually comes down to stupid snap judgements like that.

  16. Diziet Sma says:

    I found it very generic and repetitive, though the combat was quite effective and full of action.

  17. ZephaniahGrey says:

    Not sure why people were so quick to dismiss this game. The combat was fun, and actually got 10x better as you progressed. The world was vibrant and well crafted, and actually LOOKED appealing, albeit in a candy coated sorta way. It’s like people have been punished by games’ awkward combat and dreary scenery for so long they reject a break from that drudgery like a transplanted organ. It’s like everyone declares “This doesn’t hurt at all! What kinda crap is this! I wanted a GAME!”

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      You said it. People here are complaining about Amalur’s story and plot, yet they’re probably the same folks who had no issues with Skyrim’s anemic writing. And the combat is heads and tails better over anything Bethesda could produce.

      That’s the problem, I guess. KoA came out around the same time as Skyrim, so it was doomed to sit at the back of the shelf. KoA is the far superior game IMO — 30 hours for me in Skyrim, over 80 in KoA so far.

  18. Ravenholme says:

    I did buy and play it, and got so very bored so very quickly. It’s a singleplayer MMO with nothing to rescue it, imo.

  19. mehteh says:

    Far too console focus for me to like and get into. The devs lied many times over about they cared about PC, but did nothing. They said a proper FOV wasnt possible, but then a FOV hack comes along soon after its release. I wasnt going to pay $60 to support a bad dev and a console RPG

  20. Optimoos says:

    I’ve sunk way too many hours into this game, and I’m still only about 2/3rds through it. I play it in large chunks, but then end up walking away for a month or two before going back to it. Seeing this article makes me wonder if I can sit down this week and finally finish it out… maybe, maybe not.

    In the end, I feel it’s a divisive experience, lots of things to enjoy, lots of things you won’t. Mostly I think it displays a ton of potential and even though we’re all overly tired of hearing of the 38 Studios demise, this is one of the primary reasons I’m saddened that Project Copernicus is unlikely to see the light of day.

  21. scorpion_wins says:

    Because it’s got that horrible Bloom shine to it that reeks of WoW in 2006. Which invariably means it looks like everything takes place in Princess Fluffy’s Mushroom Kingdom (of Amalur). I’d rather have the Infinity engine than whatever that is.

  22. yabonn says:

    From your description, the story of this game is talented people not being rewarded. Makes me sad.

    Would be less sad if you could point out what, precisely, went wrong.

    (edited for editing)

  23. caddyB says:

    I picked it up at 5 or 10 euros on Origin. Played for two hours or so but the next day I had no drive to play it more. I just lacks that little something that made me play Skyrim for 30 hours before sleeping.

    • ScubaMonster says:

      I think a lot of that is because it’s not immersive like Skyrim. Skyrim is like I’m actually in a world and a part of it. Kingdoms of Amular played more like a single player WoW with better combat (which some might think is awesome, I thought it was alright, but the game is pretty huge and I couldn’t justify that big of a time sink, especially since I already had Skyrim).

  24. db1331 says:

    Because it hasn’t hit $5 yet.

  25. Zarunil says:

    Because Skyrim.

  26. Creeping Death says:

    I played it and loved it. In fact I put more hours into it than Skyrim (though that admittedly isn’t that big of a challenge).

    I’ve been meaning to grab the dlc and go back to it at some stage.

  27. Arren says:

    It’s far better than I expected it to be. I got it for $10 in an insane Origin sale* and thoroughly enjoyed the thirty-some hours I spent on it.

    The camera is certainly a drawback. The excessive breadth of the world leads to many sloppy moments where the seams are all too apparent, as it were. The QTE boss battles — which I sheepishly admit didn’t bother me all that much — remain the albatross that they are. Despite all this, the visceral combat was more fun than most any other ARPG I’ve played, and the simplistic leveling system was good enough to keep me entertained. It’s unapologetically gamey compared to the ersatz realism of the Elder Scrolls games**, but that isn’t really to its detriment.

    I can see it being an abysmal game for completionists: as wu wei said, if the player takes it upon themselves to do every sidequest (or even most of ‘em), I don’t doubt it wrecks the progression. Personally, I somewhat enjoyed picking and choosing which digressions to engage in, and thus found the progression enjoyable.

    * Game of Thrones for $10, Arkham City for $10 — yes I know I’m positively the avatar of lameness for not having played AC when it came out.

    ** Which I also enjoy, to make me even more of a laughingstock in this community, I’m sure…..

  28. Snargelfargen says:

    Firstly, the game John describes is very, very different from the impression I got from advertising and previews.
    I was under the impression that the game was completely linear and filled with derivative plot fluff in order to establish a world for the MMO sequel. Maybe I overlooked some details, but when the game fails so badly, I wonder if the studio’s marketing strategy went off message. It seems like most of the press was about the game tying into the MMO. There was hardly any time spent on what made Amalur’s world unique… and so I came to the conclusion that it was entirely generic.

    Secondly, it’s competing in a crowded genre.
    Skyrim, Risen, Two Worlds, Divinity… some of these games were released years apart, but they are all 80+ hour time monsters. They may have their flaws but at least I know what they’re about.

    • ScubaMonster says:

      For all intents and purposes, the game played a lot like a single player MMO. The gameplay was something you could have taken straight out of a full fledged MMO, only the combat was a lot better than just about every MMO out there. Just without the social and multiplayer aspect. Some might love that idea, to me though, it seems like a lot of effort for a world I’ll be finished with and then most likely not return. At least MMO’s keep evolving and add new content/expansions so there’s a reason to keep playing, not to mention the interaction of other players.

      I also read that KoA had around 200 hours worth of game time if you did everything. That’s a pretty colossal game. I just find it hard to justify spending that insane amount of hours on a single player game.

  29. paranoidandroid42 says:

    The thing with Kingdoms of Amalur is that it’s hard to point to any specific part of the game that was executed very poorly–graphically competent, not a lot of bugs, combat tries some new things, etc. It’s kind of mysterious how so many functioning elements add up to a game that’s so god-awful boring to play. A large part of it had to be that the game didn’t ever once attempt anything to inspire me to care about the setting or its inhabitants. They’re just stupid bland cookie-cutter people standing around perpetually in the same spots waiting for you to come by and accept their quests. It completely misses the sense of involvement, that idea of being a person in this world who has his own life and relationships within it that made Skyrim, the game Amalur was so obviously trying to be, so memorable.

    • ScubaMonster says:

      I think that’s precisely it. The game was competent in every category, but didn’t excel exceptionally well at any of them. Still a good game and if I had the time to spend on it, I’d easily buy it. But there’s plenty of other games I’d rather play first.

  30. ScubaMonster says:

    I played the demo on Xbox 360 and I didn’t encounter any bugs. Granted, it was the demo, but the demo was basically the full game with like an hour time limit or something (been a while). Maybe the 360 version wasn’t as buggy.

  31. trjp says:

    I bought it and played it a lot – it has many issues which I think are all notable parts of it’s failure

    1 – it crammed every possible mechanic from every RPG you’ve ever played into one game irrespective of whether it was needed or worked – it felt like a hodgepodge or a greatest-hits album – or even a supergroup concept album

    2 – it required a staggering amount of grind – I think you’d level faster in WoW now than you would in this

    3 – the story was deeply forgettable

    4 – there’s tonne of gear and almost all of it is shit (see also Borderlands 1/2) so you feel more like a pack mule than a player

    5 – it has not 1 original idea of it’s own – not a single 1

    That last one is probably it’s biggest failure – it was a massive effort to make something people had already made.

  32. jellydonut says:

    Because it looks like yet another boring fantasy RPG.

  33. Hawks says:

    I tried the demo. I thought the art and humour was flat, and the combat was boring.

    I didnt buy it because it didnt interest me /shrug

  34. Warlokk says:

    I bought it as a change of pace from Skyrim, after I had put about 200 hours or so into my first character. I played it for a good couple weeks, and it was pretty well done and enjoyable… but it got stale eventually and I never finished the main storyline, probably got about 60% or so. I just got bored. It has some good ideas but the MMO-like mechanics just didn’t hold my attention enough to keep going.

    On a related note, I’m still playing Skyrim, and have bought all the DLCs and downloaded a ton of mods. Still not bored.

  35. valczir says:

    I was genuinely interested in this game. I love open world RPGs and wasn’t remotely interested in Skyrim (I completely ignored it after I found out that Bethesda wanted to continue their idiotic level scaling BS – it’s not an RPG if you can’t stumble into a demon when you’re level 1 and get raped in one hit), so I was thoroughly curious about how this game would turn out.

    I gave the demo a shot on PS3 and combat felt boring (like an MMO without people, as other people have said – and I hate how most MMOs control). However, I would still have given it a shot on PC if it weren’t for this: http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=13862

    Gold or platinum ratings, I can deal with. Anything below that, I don’t pay money for, because I would probably need to install Windows to run them.

  36. Jack-Dandy says:

    I read it was pathetically easy, and felt really uninspired- almost like a single-player MMO. I avoid that shit like the plague.

    I’ll save my money for better things.

  37. Advanced Assault Hippo says:

    Indeed, I loved Amalur.

    If anything I enjoyed it more than Skyrim.

  38. elvencode says:

    I played the demo but found it somehow like Torchlight, an ammount of fights and quests with some story and inventory/abilities management but little interesting developments. I also disliked the cartoony style that wanted to mimic WoW, i’d have preferred some more realistic feeling from the graphics (animations included).
    As with Torchlight i bought it anyway at a lower price (20 euro i think) but i need to play it because of free space issues.
    Probably they’d have to make at least the action part more appealing to sell more.

  39. SuperNashwanPower says:

    Downloading demo now. I did before actually, but never got up the motivation to play and then wanted the disc space for something else I still haven’t played. Steam Sales, don’t cha know.

  40. maximiZe says:

    Wait, what? This was an outrageously bland game on so many levels. Also, if you want to feel actually satisfying blocking mechanics, try MGR Revengeance.

  41. Dark Acre Jack says:

    Judging by the comments it would seem that the answer to the question is “many gamers are cheap & want to swallow 100+ hour experiences in a weekend, & pass judgement on epic behemoth games based on the quality of a limited demo vs. the quality of the creative people who crafted the game itself.”

    I feel sorry for anyone who fits that description. I’m still picking away at the content in Amalur & every time I load it up it enthralls me for just as long as it should before returning me to the real world.

    This was & still is worth far more than 60 dollars, & if sprawling RPGs that have built entire cohesive worlds filled with lore aren’t for you, you know where the door is.

  42. WalkableBuffalo says:

    Always support the underdog!
    This why I bought Frontlines Fuel of War and loved it
    I also bought Rage, but that doesn’t fall into this category
    But really there are lots of good ‘B’ games or games which were pushed aside by big triple A games which are worth your time or at least to have a little fun

  43. Vorphalack says:

    ”Origin” – ”Amalur is riddled by bugs” – ”so many similarities with a game like World Of Warcraft” – ”the wayward mouse” – ”the RPG side of things is watered down”

    I mean, I could keep going with this, but i’m sure you can tell that you’ve answered your own question within the article.

    • John Walker says:

      Er, you realise one of those was from a line saying a thing it *doesn’t* do, right?

      • Vorphalack says:

        I didn’t realise i’d quoted out of context there (i’m ill and it’s all a bit blurry so I skim read some bits), but in my opinion the point about the RPG elements is valid. From the youtube coverage I got to see I can’t say I was impressed with the writing quality, voice acting, lore or setting. If you want to defend that angle then we will have to agree to disagree, but anyway, the other 4 points still stand.

    • Arglebargle says:

      Combat designed for controller, funky camera angles, really awful inventory handling, and so on. Those three are enough for me to chuck the game right there. All pretty evident from the demo as well. If I could change or mod those things away, it would be a different story.

      I don’t put up with bad interface any more, no matter what wonders you may be trying to deliver.

  44. Larington says:

    Recently I caught myself whistling a theme. It took me a moment, but then I remembered, it was from this game. Sadly I found myself drifting away from further playtime after getting to the other side of a wide river and didn’t really go back. The mistake was trying to be a completist and do all the sidequests. Save file will be dead too I think.

    However, I did thoroughly enjoy my time with it, regardless of whether the hype machine or poor demo versions might try to say otherwise or not.

  45. dozier77 says:

    This has been on my Steam wishlist for quite a while. About half an hour ago I cleaned up my wishlist and deleted this game. Then I came over to RPS and see this article. Game is back on the wishlist. But I promise you this, Steam, I will not pay $60 for it!

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      You can buy it from other retailers, you know. Unless you absolutely just need to see it in your Steam library, in which case you’re boned.

  46. DK says:

    Amalur had the big problem of being a little too big for it’s own good. More depth instead of just more content, especially in the combat system, would have been a huge boon. Cutting the number of filler quests in half would also help, because there’s just too much stuff that ultimately ends up being samey to do in every “hub”.

    It effectively has the grind and size of an MMO, but no multiplayer component, so what’s the size and grind there for?

    Despite that it’s one of the best RPGs of the 21st Century – and with an original (for video games at least) setting to boot.

  47. Saarlaender39 says:

    Well, I didn’t play it, because -somehow- I had the impression, it was just another MMO – a genre, in which I’m just not interested.

    Can’t really say, how I came to this conclusion, but after it was made, I didn’t read anything related to the game…until now (and even now only out of boredom, tbh).

    And reading the comments so far has not really strenghtend my wish to buy and play it.

  48. Xardas Kane says:

    Yeah, John, but no. The world didn’t have any depth, the writing was subpar, the quests – generic, and the world as derivative as they get. It was a fun action RPG, but you make it out to be a marvelous hidden gem, the Fable that Molyneux promised and never delivered.

    But it wasn’t. A fun game, sure, but nothing much.

  49. derbefrier says:

    been waiting for this game to go on sale. A friends of mine played it on the console box and he loved it, but then again he bought it at a pawnshop for 5 bucks and i have never seen it that cheap yet for PC, not saying i wouldnt pay more than 5 but I am not paying full price on something I am not 100% sure i will enjoy.

  50. gschmidl says:

    Pretty sure EA will never, ever discount it on Steam. Why would they? They’ve got Origin (where it’s cheap and often on sale for cheaper).

    Bought it on launch day, didn’t regret. Got me back into gaming after a long period of not caring, actually.

  51. morrolan says:

    Reason for not playing from what I remember: childish art style; extremely poor dialogue and story; poor early quests.

    • silentdan says:

      You know, I can’t remember having such an immediate and intense hatred of a game as I did for KoA. I freely admit that I didn’t give it a fair shake, and i often stick up for “misunderstood” games, but I thought KoA was utter crap. The opening scenes irritated the hell out of me — hated the voice actors’ voices, hated the art style, hated the little bits of detail in the world. I hated the combat so much that words fail me. I recall them talking up how every hit felt like it had heft and impact, and was bitterly disappointed to find the exact opposite. Twenty minutes after starting the game, I just couldn’t take one second more of it. Very seldom do I immediately uninstall a game I’ve played for less than half an hour, much less a deep RPG, but I’ll never play KoA again. Sad that I’m missing out on the high points, but I wouldn’t have noticed them anyway, with the mood that game put me in. I haven’t actually played Colonial Marines, but I’d rather be forced to do the whole campaign in one sitting then spend five more minutes with KoA.

  52. Bilateralrope says:

    Probably because the demo sucked and EA made sure everyone played the demo by giving ME3 players unlocks for playing it to completion. What the demo showed me was a world that was competently designed, but there was nothing that stood out except the amount of time I spent traveling from one place to another for the next plot point or part of a side quest.

    After playing the demo and deciding that it was a forgettable game, I forgot about it. So did every part of the internet I visited until the bankruptcy. Then the only reason people were talking about KoR was the KoR fanboys who were convinced it was a successful game despite not even coming close to breaking even.

  53. Flint says:

    I loved the game to a certain extent but I echo a lot of less positive sentiments in these comments as well. The size is at first a wonderful thing but then two things begin to make the game crack and creak.

    One, the sheer amount of stuff to do ends up overleveling your character massively and challenge never picks up – even for a gamer like me who doesn’t mind a lack of challenge it started to feel a bit too boring.

    Two, there’s no reason for the game to be as large as it is, as there are some clear filler areas – the desert region in whole in particular has nothing interesting going on visually or quest-wise and it feels completely tacked on. I was madly in love with the game at first but after a point I had to start forcing myself to continue playing, and even did the unthinkable and stopped doing sidequests (which for a completionist like me is completely bizarre). The game does pick itself up in the last area though and my interest was reignited.

    Three, the crafting system is overpowered to the point of being broken. The loot system loses its meaning and the unique weapons become completely pointless when you can just go to the nearest forge and craft a doomsday weapon from easily available materials.

    But still… the bits I loved I REALLY loved. Singleplayer MMO actually sounded like a great idea to me and it still does, and Amalur scratched that itch well. The visuals are GORGEOUS and while the world/lore is not the most engaging, I did find myself rather immersed and in love with the place every now and then. The character class system is pretty fun and wide for all kinds of gameplay styles, and the combat itself is enjoyable.

    Flawed but good. Definitely worth a play in my opinion. Might actually replay it soon.

  54. Strangerator says:

    Played the demo, but there were definitely some problems getting it working. Then you start the game and realize you pretty much NEED a controller instead of mouse and keyboard. So basically, the only way it differed from an MMO is the control scheme and lack of annoying people (which is ok).

    Skyrim also kinda was keeping me busy at this point. My console gaming friend, with exceptionally low standards mind you, actually bought this game and gave it a “meh.” So I await the next Steam sale where it is… 10 dollars?

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      You don’t NEED a controller to play KoA, just like you don’t NEED a controller to play Skryim.

      I prefer playing KoA with a controller, but it works just fine with a keyboard and mouse too.

      • MarcP says:

        Lashing out at everyone doesn’t make a convincing case for the game you think you’re defending. If anything, it’s the other way around.

        • SkittleDiddler says:

          I think you are misinterpreting what I wrote. Read the post I was responding to and then come back and accuse me of “lashing out”.

          • MarcP says:

            Using caps on the Internet implies yelling. Typoing a six letter game name adds fuel to the perception you’re angry.

            That said, I was obviously (why else would I say you lash out at *everyone*?) not referring to this particular comment alone. I happened to pick the last post out of a series of many (a red flag in itself) you made at the time. On top of that most of these replies are needlessly aggressive and don’t offer any real input.

            Now, as a bystander with no preconception or knowledge about the game, who do you think I am likely to listen to? People who present their opinion and argue their point, or the one raging lunatic who’s jumping at everyone’s throat, flinging personal attacks and jabs at other games but not offering a single counterpoint?

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            First off, Strangerator used all caps when typing the word “need” in his post. He was obviously stressing that he thought the game was forcing him to use a controller. By using all-caps for the same word in my response, I was stressing the fact that one does not “need” a controller to play the game.

            Secondly, pointing out a spelling error in my response and attributing that to some kind of uncontrollable rage on my part is ridiculous. When you mistype a word, is it because you’re angry, or is it because you simply hit the wrong key?

            Thirdly, you’ve got every right to be offended by my posts — I speak directly, and I understand that sometimes some random person on the internet is going to misconstrue what I type. That’s fine, but it’s apparent you don’t share my opinion on this topic, so you feel the need to single me out by implying that I’m the only one in this thread making aggressive posts and not adding anything to the discussion. Not only is that unfair, it’s inaccurate.

            Finally, I threw no direct insults at anyone in this thread. Other threads? Sure, I’m guilty of overstepping my boundaries every once in a while. But not here.

            Please stop overreacting.

      • Cunning Linguist says:

        I don’t get some of the comments about controllers. Skyrim is terrible with a gamepad, because it has no target lock system for melee combat. Some games are made for gamepads, and you can use an xbox360 gamepad on the PC just fine. FPS games are for keyboard &mouse but pretty much any other kind of action game is better with a gamepad, fro most people.

        I guess the issue here is that this fails as an action game because of the drawn-out RPG element.

  55. orbitobject says:

    I played the demo, and after a while I just got bored. I liked this better when it was fucking Fable: The Lost Chapters. the demo offered nothing over a game I already own and can install at any time.

    Seriously, the Dynasty Warriors series feels more different from game to game than this did compared to Fable 1.

  56. lamiamistral says:

    Decent to good combat couldn’t save it from a high price tag, horrifyingly bland world, and utterly generic writing that did nothing to give you a reason to care about anything you were doing. Really makes me wonder how much of the budget they blew on R.A. Salvatore.

    • Arglebargle says:

      Whatever it was it was probably too much….

      Though that might be unfair: Perhaps he is actually good at world design.

  57. Heliocentric says:

    Heard you had no control over the narrative, stopped caring. Its an AR PEE GEE, I know I have no control over the plot in Batman: AC or Portal but they have swooshy flying and cunning puzzles.

    But truth be told the biggest battle this game faced with me was that I have grown to hate ARPGs especially if they lack coop. I don’t want to spend time collecting shit to then refine it, to them craft it, to then wear it to then collect different shit.

  58. Stevostin says:

    “Why Didn’t Everyone Play Kingdoms Of Amalur?!”

    “(yes, I picked 360 controls for this, and with the wayward mouse it’s definitely the better option, and the one with which the game was obviously primarily designed to be played)”

    I know RPS journalist find it entirely natural to allways have a gamepad on their PC, but did anyone ever tried a survey ? My bet is that something like <10% of PC gamers are owning a gamepad. So there is something seriously mad about making a PC game aimed first at pad experience.

    And there's a good reason for that. With the exception of a few subgenre (space combat, car driving, some platforming, some beat them all) mouse is just better. Actually, to someone like me who learned to play on a keyboard, lack of analogish sticks is generally largely compensated by 100% accurate diagonals. Typically that one ? Should be just perfectly fine on a mouse & keyboard, like anything Arkham is.

    As for myself, a 3rd person RPG has very little chance to interest me. I bought Witcher (and regreted it) because the workd and writing were said to be worth it. But that multicolor awfullness above ? Please. I am not a 12 year old anymore. I am a grown up. Nearly an old fart actually. Which is core PC audience BTW.

  59. Agnol117 says:

    You know, it’s funny: I have Amalur and both DLCs on my hard drive, but I haven’t really gotten that far into it yet. Not for lack of trying, though. It’s just that whenever I start to play any part of it, I am reminded that “oh, other game did this element better.” And that’s it’s biggest problem. Amalur tries so hard to be this ultimate RPG by having so much to do, but in the end it all boils down to Amalur trying too hard to be like everyone else, rather than really doing it’s own thing.

  60. Hug_dealer says:

    Playing the demo clued me into what the game was.

    Cliche Action RPG with Cliche everything. It couldnt be anymore bland or cliche if it tried. The Demo thank god saved me this game.

    I’m glad you like it, but it really was a whole lot of average.

  61. valz says:

    I played it for a lot of hours. I realized I was doing the same thing over and over and was tired of it, so I decided to focus on the main quest and not do any more of the endless sidequests. The main quest felt no different. Very soon after that, I reached a second game-breaking bug (the first was remedied by loading a savegame just before it) and quit playing forever.

    The combat is quite enjoyable.

    In the end, I can’t recommend the game.

  62. Noise says:

    Glad to hear you were only roleplaying as an atheist because being an atheist is worse than being hitler.

  63. amateurviking says:

    I bought this on sale on Origin a wee bit after it came out. Skyrim was the reason I barely played it at the time.

    Coincidentally I went back to it 3-4 weeks ago to have another bash, but it didn’t stick. Thuink I’ll give it another go now though.

  64. sd4f says:

    I have a brand new copy which i’m yet to play (seriously don’t want to touch origin). In late 2011 i was invited to a media event hosted by IGN au, and they had two developers from big huge games, or whoever the actual developer was, and they were interesting because Planescape: Torment was the game they put on a pedestal. From the limited time i played it, it felt like god of war with a bit of talking, mix in some final fantasy visuals, and that kingdoms of alamalamauamalaua

    • maximiZe says:

      “From the limited time i played it, it felt like god of war with a bit of talking, kind of like a final fantasy game.”

      This sentence confuses me deeply.

      • sd4f says:

        Combat was very much GoW inspired, in that you had quick time events and button mashing, the rest of the gameplay was more like a final fantasy game, the feel of the maps, scenery and more involved RPG elements than GoW (which basically had nothing), story was a redressed imagining of planescape torment.

        I suppose the best way to describe the game, is that it’s a real bitsa, it didn’t really do anything of its own, most of it was just a reimplementation of ideas from other games, it didn’t seem bad as a result, but i just haven’t had time to delve into it, and i didn’t really see anything that would compel me to create an origin account.

        I think i should have said that it was like final fantasy 12 with the real time god of war combat mechanic, rather than the gambit system.

  65. craigdolphin says:

    I never bothered with it despite being somewhat interested as I am not willing to put up with steam or origin client requirements to play games on my pc. If it ever releases on GOG I may give it a go then. Otherwise, no.

  66. SirKicksalot says:

    I really hate the navigation in this game. It feels like a shitty early-gen effort where you can’t jump up or down to a different elevation but you’re forced to follow linear paths. Even when the difference is about 10 cm. It’s driving me crazy and someone from BHG actually said this was a fix planned for the sequel.

    There’s also the fucking boring lore, story and Fae design. Most loot is so good that nothing is actually good, if you know what I mean. The balance is FUBAR.

    I liked those lore stones, they had catchy tunes and voices.

  67. Phinor says:

    I put well over 100 hours into Amalur and while it never reached top tier quality, I enjoyed most of my time with the game. I rarely have the urge to see and finish everything in a game but I did just that with Amalur. Just a very solid game that sadly will be forgotten now that the IP is dead.

  68. ass wasp says:

    I won a copy from a contest, played it for a few hours and i felt cheated despite getting the game for free. It was not a good game.

  69. Lethys says:

    The character movement was atrocious in that game to the point where I only played 3 hours of a $60 game I’d been looking forward to for months. It felt like you were ice skating. One of the reasons I love GTA is actually that it feels like the characters and cars have weight. The story of Amalur was also so ridiculous to me. They throw so much at you in terms of lore in the first few hours that none of it mattered to me. Elder Scrolls has a lot of lore but it’s perfect because they do it slowly and you can go at your own pace. It was just a massive, uninspired quest grind.

  70. mattevansc3 says:

    Main problem was that Skyrim was a media darling that could do no wrong and KOA:TR was heavily criticised for making the same errors Skyrim did (though not as bad) so was unfairly made to look considerably worse.

  71. El_MUERkO says:

    It annoyed me to look at it. Too WoWlike.

  72. McDan says:

    Played the demo before launch, which was quite good actually. It letting you do whatever you want for pretty much an hour and a half after getting out of the tutorial. Combat was really enjoyable as well, just never got around to getting it at the time. But seeing as it’ll be cheaper now, and you’ve written this excellent article John, I’ll probably see about getting it. Cheers.

  73. Jae Armstrong says:

    I played it! I preordered it, in fact. And I had a lot of fun with it, right up to the point where I hit the badlands/desert area. That was the point where I hit the top of my warrior tree and the combat system began to unravel on itself. I still finished it (the final boss is naff as fuck), but after that it was more an exercise in sheer bloody-mindedness than anything else.

    Up until that though, the combat really was great and I had great fun with the crafting system. I think, with a little more depth, that could have been one of the best RPG crafting systems around.

  74. Emeraude says:

    The main problem with the game for me is that it felt so terribly mediocre and uninspiring. And contrary to Bioware games (well the decent ones), it didn’t even have that “serviceable but forgettable blockbuster” quality to it. Ii just felt bland and devoid of grace.

    To quote my brother, who’s a mean bastard: “Amalur is to action-adventure games what Boris Vallejo is to Luis Royo”.

    It just felt like it tried and missed most marks. Not by far, which is all the more painful. Because it had its heart in the right place.

    Too bad, I really wanted to like it.

  75. SkittleDiddler says:

    RPS reader comments regarding Kingdoms of Amalur- Reckoning:
    “What a shite game”
    “A soulless RPG experience”
    “Lacking in originality”
    “An empty MMO-like world”

    RPS reader comments regarding Skyrim- Elder Scrolls V:
    “What a fantastic game”
    “An immersive RPG experience”
    “Original story and plot”
    “As close as you’re going to get to reality in a fantasy setting”

    I just don’t fucking get it.

    • x1501 says:

      Hey, as far as I’m concerned, they’re both “shite”. Happy?

    • Emeraude says:

      Yeah, weirds me out too really.

      I mean, from what I have seen of Skyrim, it was a terribly soulless game, a devolved reiteration under a shiny coat of paint, that got forgiven way more than it should have, on grounds I do not even begin to understand.

      Amalur was a mess in design from what I remember (should try and track my notes), but it still has it beat as far as being a game is concerned.

    • Agnol117 says:

      The difference, as I see it, is that Skyrim ultimately was what it set out to be, whereas Amalur was made out to be this grand RPG the likes of which the world had never seen before, and ended up a disappointment. Skyrim was a known quantity — we all knew what to expect, and got basically that. Amalur, on the other hand, was hyped up to be something huge, and fell far short of that.

    • RakeShark says:

      I think the nordic/viking vibe of Skyrim was enough to stand shoulders above KoA, which seemed to be just another general fantasy game that I’m pretty sure I’ve played before.

    • benkc says:

      Sure, if you cherry-pick just those comments and ignore all the counterexamples.

      • SkittleDiddler says:

        You’re absolutely right. I cherrypicked for a reason.

        There are some reasonable comments here as to why Amalur is not the better game for some people, but the majority of them just reek of a silly “Because its not Skyrim, that’s why” mentality.

        • Azdeus says:

          Skyrim has nude mods. Nuff said.

          Someone mentioned that modders had made “TressFX” style hair for Skyrim, so I checked out Skyrim Nexus. I checked 8 pages, and I found more pubic hair mods than animated hair.

    • Upper Class Twit says:

      Well I thought the environment in Skyrim was way cooler than the whole “looks a lot like World of Warcaft” thing Amalur had going for it (based on the demo, I’m not sure how much it changes over the course of the game).

      Also, you should probably pay attention to the comment section of the next article mentioning Skyrim. The hivemind’s opinion seems to be mixed at best.

    • Cunning Linguist says:

      I sank hundreds of hours into Skyrim, because of the awesome landcapes and caverns, the soundtrack , and the mods .

      It was my first serious RPG and Bethesda game , and most of it was an ordeal, esp. since i was playing with below minimum spec at low resolution. For someone new to the genre , Skyrim was a real punisher. Especially since the PC version was using console FOV settings (which made combat and general navigation a horror) and console -style UI horribly patched with mouse control. Some of the default game settings were atrocious…. I spent days scouring the net for tweaks, and messing around with ini files and at times incompatible mods.

      I hated a lot about the game, and the glitches took a lot of the fun out and eventually killed the immersion as the main story line glitched out at a rather crucial moment and I had to use the console to force that quest to complete. It was the part where you use the scroll to see into the past. . . The scripted scene failed to complete, and I re-loaded and tried again dozens of times, having to watch through most of the scene each time , only to have it fail to complete.

      After that I used some mods to boost some stats because I had messed up with my perks (irreversible choices early on, duh), and just explored the game leisurely not giving much of a damn about the stories. The magic is pathetically underpowered and unsatisfying to use, and fighting the backwards skating mages is a joke. Finishing the main quest led to an under-climax, as the world fails to change after you defeat the Big Bad Devil. You get a few songs and a few people dancing around and that’s it. The only diffrerence effected int eh world by the player that was something tangible was reviving that dead tree early on in the game, and see it grow and flower over a few days, and that was a side quest that was all too easy to miss.
      There were far too many manhunt quests, and the best weapons in the game (apart from the stuff you could craft with potions and enchanting) were to be had by performing demonic sacrifices. There was some rather adolescent imbalance towards the “evil soul eater” side of things in the roleplay options. There was even an NPC in the Dark Brotherhood boasting about how she’d killed the last unicorn, because the Beth developers are too mature and dark for that fantasy shit , and cannot even bear to animate two characters hugging in their game.

      The game felt empty and soulless in terms of NPCs , and the quests were pathetic and often downright pathological, written by people with some personal issues.

      It s the incredible art direction and general immersiveness that lift Skyrim to a lofty and memorable status.

      The thing is , now I have a better PC and I stil want to re-install and go back to that world in HD, because it is so epic. But I don’t think I would have stuck with the game if I hadn’t been housebound and with nothing else to play at the time .

      Will check this KoA game out, my interest is piqued. If Skyrim had a serious or fun combat system we’d have been so much better off.

      • Cunning Linguist says:

        Darn, got hugely sidetracked. I was posting to say that after playing Skyrim I tried out several older RPGs, and was shocked to discover that there was nothing original in Skyrim whatsoever.

  76. Jimbo says:

    Because everyone who played it Reckoned it sucked. But maybe Amalurk into it myself.

  77. Liudeius says:

    For me it’s primarily DRM, secondly price, and third, I assumed there would be $40 of DLC and hoped to get it in a complete edition.
    I don’t actually know if there is any DLC because I’ve not kept up, but considering your story:

    “For whatever peculiar reason, the set of EA servers that allowed that game to check in on itself worked, and after some moronic requirement to “authenticate” my PC, two separate EULAs, and yet more logging in, I was able to get to a game menu.”

    I’m not going to be playing it for a while.
    I’ve not even played Far Cry 3 because of how much I hate DRM.
    Eventually if I’m using an internet connection from which I can safely torrent a crack, I might buy it.

    • Emeraude says:

      Oh yeah, DRM, I was trying to remember why I played this on console at my friend’s place and hadn’t simply bought it.

  78. aliksy says:

    Also Skyrim has mod support. Does KoA have mods? Surprised no one’s bringing that up when comparing it to Skyrim.

    • Emeraude says:

      Mostly because Skyrim + Mods isn’t Skyrim I guess.
      Personally find it only fair to compare the games as they were delivered by both companies.

      • Arglebargle says:

        I would have to disagree. I get Bethesda stuff, in part, because I know there will be a strong modding scene working on the many foibles and screwups of the design team. As well as adding things. I suspect Bethesda happily cuts corners because of it. But, say, when the Skyrim inventory system is screwed or just not to my taste, someone will fix it.

        It goes into the choice to get the thing in the first place, which makes it matter, imo.

        • Emeraude says:

          The fact that there are mods explain a lot about TES games surviving their flaws (as I keep saying, Bethesda doesn’t deserve its modding community), but I can’t count those mods as part of the game when trying to evaluate and compare critically end-products as delivered by publishers.

        • Klingsor says:

          This! Modding is what makes Bethesda’s games from mediocre to a cool experience and the only reason wyh I still buy their games

  79. biz says:

    something about the marketing

    if Big Huge Games was not involved with this, I would not have even looked at it.

    after having actually played it, I think it’s the best game of its type (if using difficulty mods)

    that doesn’t mean it’s particularly well-made, but it’s way better than Oblivion / Skyrim

    how many decent action games actually have open worlds and stories and role-playing? that is the competition, and this game utterly and completely destroys it

  80. Eddy9000 says:

    Because it said it was an MMO. Is it? If it isn’t an MMO I’ll buy it and try it out.

    • Shadowcat says:

      Yeah, from the bits I’d seen I really really thought this was a MMO. That’s the reason I utterly ignored it. That said, I still doubt that I’d have bought it — it doesn’t sound like something I need to play, and the backlog is too big to bother with something I’m not sure about.

  81. zeekthegeek says:

    I tried playing it. I did not enjoy it. Case closed.

  82. Eldiran says:

    For me, at least, the problem is: it’s impossible to lose.

    Seriously. Buy 30 potions with a tiny handful of cash. Bam, you win forever. Get a full heal at any time with no delay or cooldown.

    Naturally, the empty world, restrictive UI, and unpredictable hitstun didn’t help either.

    I’m only bitter because the game had immense potential. I still played it for 40 hours.

    • fish99 says:

      Potions do have cooldowns. However, each stack has a seperate cooldown, so you can use greater healing, then large healing straight away, then lesser healing (I forget what they’re actually called) etc.

      There were some hard fights in the game, mainly in the story quests. Admittedly there weren’t enough.

      • Eldiran says:

        Really? Huh. Thanks for the info. Sad to hear it’s still so easy to break. Although clearly the cooldowns weren’t big enough regardless since I went out of my way to test it, and didn’t notice one.

  83. fish99 says:

    I played it, all of it, and loved it. Not saying it’s perfect, it’s shotcomings are well documented, but there’s a ton of good stuff there as well.

    In contrast I played about 2 hrs of Skyrim.

  84. RakeShark says:

    I think I didn’t play it because I’m a sci-fi fan and not a fantasy fan? Aside from art style I didn’t think there was much that was appealing or fresh about it? Perhaps I got it confused with the MMO they were trying to make and I don’t play MMOs anymore?

  85. Mephz says:

    First of all did not play it because my laptop could not run the demo smoothly, but could play skyrim smoothly as an example.

    Also:

    EA (I avoid games they touch)
    origin (no thank you, not on my computer)
    high price on steam
    Other more interesting games around…I still haven’t played far cry 3 for example.

  86. felltablet says:

    Usually I agree with many of the contributors opinions on RPS, however, I do not understand your positive perspective on this title. This game was a rather surprising disappointment in almost every aspect. They hired a noted writer, but the story is shallow and cliche. The world is huge, but empty and devoid of life or character. The combat is responsive but does not continually evolve past the 1rst section of the game. The missions are easily accessible but not rewarding. All in all, it seems to be exactly what it is: an unfinished MMO that had to be reduced to a sigle player experience.

    I would have said that I am confused about your review, but after this statement, “For me, what’s made this especially special, is it’s the first time I’ve ever bothered to properly engage with a game’s blocking mechanic.”…….
    I just think you don’t have any reference for decent third person action games.

  87. UncleLou says:

    I liked it a lot at the beginning, but got a bit bored with the initially fun combat because the game just kept getting easier and easier – although I already avoided most of the sidequests. Stopped somewhere at the 15 hour mark I guess, when ai simply got distracted by something else. Not a bad game, though.

  88. Citrus says:

    No one is playing it because it is a piece of shit game.

    When I started playing it, I was satisfied with the Fable 1 combat (which I enjoyed) and even the generic skills thrown in by developers. But more time I spent, the stupid cliche-fest of characters and the plot started reminding me of Bethesda’s masterturds, aka, TES series.

    Not to mention, somehow Amalur writer managed to make the Eleves even more annoying and stupid (NOW THEY HAVE SHITTY POEMS AS WELL).

    Pros:
    - OK visuals.
    - Good combat similar to Fable 1 (hell, the game is pretty much Fable 1 ripoff, except the fun story and characters part).

    Cons
    - Feels like a MMO, shit, boring and generic (like every MMO out there, including LOTRO and WOW)
    - You reach the level limit HOURS before the game is even close to end.
    - LEVEL SCALING! Enemies are locked to the level you enter the area in. So if you entered on lvl 1, prepare to slaughter everything after levelling up only two more times.
    - LEVEL SCALING. I seriously DID NOT find any challenge in combat even from bosses after going over lvl 20 or something (played it long time ago). I stopped playing cause I WAS ONE HIT KILLING EVEN THE BOSS MONSTERS!
    - SHIT STORY AND CHARACTERS. It is like Oblivion and Skyrim had a retard child.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      Once again someone trots out the Skyrim/Fable/MMO comparisons. Why not judge a game based on its own merits?

      • Citrus says:

        You obviously haven’t played the game. Amalur copied almost everything, even art style from Fable (with hints of WOW, but character design was complete copy of Fable, along with action and abilities).

        Game didn’t do anything new, or didn’t improve upon anything Fable did (kinda like rest of the Fable games..). Amalur was just shit, there isn’t anything interesting in the world.

        • SkittleDiddler says:

          I’ve put 80+ hours into KoA:R so far, and I plan on doing another run when I finally finish it. I’ve also played every single game you mentioned in your “review”.

          While the art style in Amalur is similar to Fable, it’s definitely not a carbon copy. The environments are completely different and have a much more fantastical bent to them. If going to make comparisons, at least be accurate — Amalur is much closer to games like Morrowind and WoW when it comes to setting and terrain.

          Character design? I’ll give you that one.

          Actions/Abilities? Meh, Amalur contains the standard mix of skill mechanics that are so common to theses types of games, although I don’t remember Fable’s being as deep as what Amalur offers.

          Originality? Don’t even go there. There hasn’t been a completely original RPG for decades; unfortunately that includes KoA:R.

  89. ffordesoon says:

    Nobody played it because the marketing was complete shit. And I don’t just mean the ads; everything the developers chose to focus on when selling the game was deliberately meant to remind players of things they already liked. From the generic name to the inevitable listing of the creators involved in every preview to the presumptuous “this is a prequel to the MMO that everyone will play because that’s how things work” attitude, all the prerelease hype exuded the hubris of a bunch of “name” creators assuming they could sell something on their names alone.

    They rarely listed any standout features or particularly interesting bits of lore or anything else that might get gamers excited, and relied instead on reminding people of other things they already owned and liked. They made the classic mistake of planting implicit comparisons to other things in people’s minds instead of explaining why people needed this game in their lives. They compared the opening to Planescape: Torment, for example, leading Torment fans playing the thing for the first time to compare its opening – which is a fairly standard tutorial section with a similar plot hook – to Torment’s opening. Of course it was found wanting!

    Every element of the game they talked about was like that. “So-and-so game did this, and we have that. Oh, and remember when such-and-such game did this? We have that too!” All of which just annoyed fans of the games they compared their game to, because it wasn’t enough like any one of those games.

    Add to all that the fact that 38 Studios (and Big Huge Games, which was a well-respected company within the industry, but not really a “name”) was not a “name” developer on the level of an Infinity Ward or a Bioware, and there was simply no reason for most people to trust them. The demo sold me on the game, but it turned just as many people off, and that was the only impression most people got of the thing. It sold well enough, but not well enough to pay for the MMO that no fans of Reckoning actually wanted anyway.

    • strangeloup says:

      It was probably difficult to list any standout features or interesting lore, given that KoA is completely devoid of either.

  90. geldonyetich says:

    I heard that Kingdoms Of Amalur was good from many reviewers, and that was enough to pique my interest, but the game simply fell under the radar because it’s yet-another-fantasy-RPG and there were enough of those I had bought and was not playing that I could not justify buying another one for full price.

    For example, I’ve got The Witcher 2 here, thanks to the wonders of Steam sales, and it’s going completely untouched, thank you very much… albeit largely because I’m embarrassed for Geralt’s sex life, as it leaves me wondering if I bought the PC gamer equivalent of trashy fantasy literature, and I’m not sure I want to be caught playing it.

    Of course, as many have mentioned, that Elder Scrolls V was released just a couple months before KoA was pretty bad timing. With Skyrim in my possession, I felt relatively confident I had the best-made, expansive world, single-player fantasy RPG in that genre. Sorry, Divinity II. Sorry, Two Worlds II. Sorry, Fable III.

    Consequently, I didn’t even hear about the KoA until it was out for quite some time, and Yahtzee Croshaw is not the first person who you want me to learn of your game from, as he spelled out rather expertly what I implicitly knew: KoA was a game developed for a tiny slice of player in a massively overdeveloped genre.

    Still, that was then, and this is now. I’ve played Skyrim to death. On the advice of this article, I played the demo of Kingdoms of Amalur, and I actually changed my tune somewhat. I now believe Kingdoms of Amalur to be quite a bit more advanced than Skyrim in many ways.

  91. Grayvern says:

    Amalur still occupies a weird place in terms of combat quality, the nature of the games skill system means no or minimal barrier to good quality combat, you are basically buying moves or increased damage, so while the combat is better it’s nowhere near as good as it could be.

    It might be a mistake to have something as intense as DMC 3 in a 60 hour game, but at the same time there’s not really any reason it couldn’t be closer, and compared to console counterparts such as Dragons Dogma, which feels responsive and visceral it still somewhat lacking.

    It’s hard to articulate the difference but I guess the game just has too much delay between certain actions. The difference between Amalur and my previous example Dragons Dogma feels much like the leap Ninja Theory made between Heavenly Sword and DMC.

    The story concept of immortality and determinism vs mortality and free will and what happens when that starts to break from both ends is in interesting. Ultimately however I don’t know whether the game capitalizes on this because after the 30 or so hours I played the law still obfuscated anything interesting that may be being said in the game.

    I just didn’t enjoy the lore that much either I find the Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age and Witcher lore much more compelling.

  92. ScatheZombie says:

    Because it wasn’t Skyrim, the demo was awful and the game never goes on sale because the license is in limbo.

    I actually did play Kingdoms of Amalur though. I put probably around 20ish hours into the game. However, I didn’t recommend it to any of gaming friends because …

    1) The game becomes very repetitious and formulaic after … about 3 or 4 hours. The combat is, at first, very fun and engaging – but you quickly become so powerful that you break down into using 3 or 4 main abilities/combos and never looking back. And that happens at the 4 hour mark and the remaining 60 hours of gameplay is just repeating those same handful of moves.

    2) The skills system gives you the illusion that you can do anything you want but only really works if you super-specialize in one thing – very similar to most choose-your-own MMOs like Rift. Or, more recently, Path of Exile. You have all these amazing options at your disposal and you can, in theory, create a truly unique character. But … then you quickly realize that in order to use the bow properly you need to dump a good 15 points into the bow line. This isn’t to have a super-awesome bow – this is just to have a *viable* one; especially due to the way the limited arrows mechanic works. If you really try to plan out a character, the progression systems feels very restrictive.

    3) Side-quests were really nothing more than your most mundane MMO quests. And there are a shitload of them. The story was very cliched and generic. It has it’s moments here and there, but I constantly felt like I had seen this before.

    4) Un-Dynamic content. This is something that irked me to no end. The game actively *penalizes* exploration if you do it before advancing the main story or picking up all the side-quests in an area. For example: If you go to a new zone and enter the nearest uncharted cave – something you normally would do while exploring – you can get all the way to the end of the cave and into a *completely empty* boss room. You know why? Because you didn’t have the quest to trigger the boss to spawn. So you have to go back to town, pick up the quest, and go back to the completely empty cave … that will now have a boss and a chest at the end of it. So, if you don’t play through the content in exactly the way the devs thought you would, you will run into a lot of instances where the game breaks down (doesn’t necessarily stop you from progressing, but definitely breaks immersion) because it only loads content when you actually have it. FFS, Gothic 2 fixed this problem a decade ago.

  93. noodlecake says:

    I was put off by the starey eyes of the characters and the lifeless animations in cutscenes, which is a shame because the combat was fun and it had some interesting mechanics. I would much prefer a mostly linear but well made game with a captivating story and characters, like The Witcher 2. Non-linearity isn’t a selling point to me whatsoever.

  94. The Random One says:

    I remember playing the demo and thinking, “If I liked fantasy RPG’s, I’d play that over Skyrim any day. But I don’t. So I won’t play either.”

    A friend gave me Skyrim as a gift so I ended up playing it anyway.

  95. Quirk says:

    Personally?

    Well, I read the RPS “Wot I Think” on Kingdoms of Amalur, imbibed such choice comments as:
    “what it does not offer is anything with serious meat. No grand vision, no technical triumph, no opera.”
    “From a purely aesthetic point of view, the series of enclosed valleys it is guiding me through display none of the majesty of Skyrim’s frozen peaks, while the quests and over-arching script interest me a fraction as much as almost any other seriously conversation-heavy RPG I can think of.”
    “Ultimately, Kingdoms Of Amalur is generous but uninspired. This is a game that has been carved out of the bedrock of action RPGs by a team of well-paid professionals. Their work is fine, even nuanced, but their vision is not one that will leave you feel enriched or changed by the experience it produced. You can sense of the results of committee conclusions in almost all areas of the game. ”
    etc etc
    and came to the conclusion that I wasn’t going to go out of my way to try it; didn’t even get as far as downloading the demo.

    And frankly, from most of the comments below the line, it hardly sounds as though Jim was being unfair.

  96. Jupiah says:

    I didn’t buy it on PC because it’s *still* $60 + $25 for the dlc. That’s ridiculous for a game that’s been out this long that flopped so badly.

    I was tempted to buy it used for the Xbox, but was turned off of that idea when I learned that i’d be missing out on a bunch of content unless I purchased an “online pass”. Yes, an online pass. For a single player only RPG game. Screw that bullcrap.

    But maybe I’ll reconsider buying it if it’s as good as you say it is.

  97. Zogtee says:

    Price and Origin is why no one played it. If they had put the Steam version on sale, then it would have sold a lot better.

  98. rei says:

    I wanted to like it, and did for a while, but it got so samey that playing it turned into a chore. The best way I can put it is that it felt like a “product”, in the most cynical sense of the word, instead of something made out of love for games.

  99. rusty5pork says:

    I got bored of the generic fantasy-ness of it. Not necissarily the tropes, as I could read about elves and dwarves and shit all day. It was just the fact that the characters didn’t grab me like they did in Dragon Age, which was probably Salvatore’s doing (he has a more plot/setting focused style that doesn’t appeal to me.)

    But holy shit, I never thought of it as a commentary on how the nature of gaming changes storytelling. I might have to pick it up again.

  100. iridescence says:

    I played the demo and absolutely despised the arcade game style combat which shouldn’t be in an RPG in my opinion. Wiped out the entire first town at level 2. Figured it would be boringly easy along with the bad combat. Uninstalled.

    Does it get better later in the game?

  101. bigjig says:

    Hmm… nah.. Imma stick with Dark Souls instead

  102. Eschatos says:

    The game is too damn easy, even on Hard difficulty. If the difficulty were to be fixed via mod or path it would become a lot more fun.

  103. PenGunn says:

    It’s 3rd person. I can’t and won’t play like that. How hard could it be to give me first person?

  104. Xytal says:

    I own this on 360 (friend bought it for my for my birthday last year). I played it some (enjoying the hell out of it) but then stopped for some reason. I’ve been meaning to pick it back up, but just haven’t had the time.

  105. poohbear says:

    why is the game STILL $59.99 over a year after release? its not like there’s such a huge demand for it that they refuse to drop the price! Get a clue EA!

  106. gravity_spoon says:

    Well John, you have a Amalur fan right here. I’ve played it to the end with 3 characters, finished all story and side quests and is still the only EA game I play. I loved it. Probably is the most beautiful (without mods) rpg out there IMO. Also, story while linear never surprises to amaze you. Sad for the demise of 38 Studios but it is a good thing that some devs/artists have been hired by Crate Entertainment (Grim Dawn) and other studios as well

  107. Jenks says:

    Incredibly easy, boring game. I got about 10 hours in, but the second 5 hours was me dragging myself on to justify the first 5 hours. It’s constructed a lot like modern MMOs, which is to say it’s built from the ground up to “entertain” without making you think, at all.

  108. TsunamiWombat says:

    Because it’s still 60 on steam. Likely because of EA

  109. mmalove says:

    It looked interesting, but as others have mentioned here, it refuses to go on sale on steam to match the discounts offered on other sites, and I’d prefer not to dump money into EA/Origin.

  110. Rapzid says:

    “sprawling story and vast numbers of sidequests. It features superbly in-depth combat”
    Well it seems like I’m not crazy. Reading the comments it appears a majority don’t see what you’re seeing in the game. Sprawling with vast numbers of sidequests? It sure sprawls all right and I think there are TOO many sides quests. I was SO burned out by these samey side quests that involved so much walking around I would have like 1M frequent flyer miles if I were traveling Delta that I blitzed through the last 1/4-1/3 of the game just to see the end. The last section felt like slog more than anything. The pacing and combat, which I would not call “superbly in-depth”, just fell apart right after half-way.

  111. fooga44 says:

    The problem was the combat was a bit on the slow side and it really should have been an action oriented RPG instead of an MMO /w action oriented combat. The MMO elements killed it because the structure of the quests and the huge landscape without adequately fast travel time made the game tedious.

    It should have been a more on rails experience for that kind of game. The open world quest bits kind of fucked up the games pacing and story elements big time. They couldn’t make the story coherent because they had too much going on with the whole MMO element.

    The guys behind it just had a bad design from the getgo. They shouldn’t have tried to make an MMO and then make a retrofit single player MMO. They should have just made a single player game from the getgo.

    Lets not forget Kurt schilling is an inexperienced dick who totally was behind the fucked up development of Amalur.

    RPS should stop sucking Amalurs dick, Amalur was a clusterfuck no matter which way you slice it. The guys behind it made bad design decisions – there’s lots in amalur that could have been fixed in a sequel but they shouldn’t have tried to make an MMO to begin with. Especially with the whole action oriented RPG combat system they had going on. Amalur really wants to be more of an action game /w loot elements rather then a boring as fuck with slow travelling and shit quests everywhere MMO.

  112. Tjermnon says:

    I don’t get it. I’ve played through the whole game twice (including dlc) and never ever encountered a single bug. (200+ hours)
    If the game weren’t too easy (even on hard only the first 7-8 levels are somewhat more challenging) I would be tempted to install it again for a third time to see how a full scale magic user works.

  113. Jocuri says:

    Fascinating Sandbox World to Uncover – The five areas within Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning are loaded with breathtaking landscapes, mysterious towns and cities, amazing animals, grotesque foes in addition to colourful individuals in which to talk to. Jocuri carti

    • Rapzid says:

      While the art was, in my opinion, a bit uninspired and generic at times VERY competent and one of the strongest assets the game had to offer. I just felt like the game was getting in the way of the art and story by the end:/

  114. Yosharian says:

    So it’s an MMO… that’s competing with Skyrim?

    • Hmm-Hmm. says:

      Are you being facetious? No, it’s not an MMO. It’s an single player RPG with some MMO trappings, an open world (although some parts need to be opened up due to developments in the story) and ‘actiony’ combat.

  115. Prime says:

    Tempting…I’ve been bingeing on RPGs lately. After Skyrim I did Divinity 2 (interesting), have just ploughed my way through Two Worlds (Better than average), and am now trying to get through Gothic 3 (good, once I turned the alternative balancing off). Next I was considering Two worlds II…and Amalur.

    The thing that turns me off Amalur is the Origin tie-in. I’ve successfully avoided Origin so far, even denying myself Mass Effect 3. I’m not a fan of game clients and definitely not a fan of EA. So…I might yet be tempted one day, but I fear today is not that day. Looks good, though. I think I’d enjoy it.

    • Rapzid says:

      So I’m not the only one! I’ve also not played mass effect 3(and may not after the whole ending debacle) and looks like Dead Space 3 is going on the back burner as well because of Origin:/ Even though word is out that they “JJ’d(Abram)” Deadspace 3 even more than 2, I’m still keen to co-op it with my mate. But Origin… :/

      • Prime says:

        Yeah, I’ll have to play my girlfriend’s Xbox copy, I reckon. But that does require getting the girlfriend away from the Xbox, and Dragon’s Dogma…

  116. Zenicetus says:

    …Because I tried the demo, and after 2.5 years of WoW before bailing out, I didn’t want a “WoW Lite” with no other players.

    Honestly, I think it was mostly the art style. It reminded me too much of WoW, without any compelling reason to buy the game at full price after playing the demo. I played Skyrim up to level 30 on one character before quitting, because even though it wasn’t any better than what I saw in the Amalur demo in terms of the game mechanics, at least it didn’t constantly remind me of the WoW art style.

  117. jrodman says:

    I found it passable but dull from the demo, which I played after they fixed it a bit. Stories of “it gets better” got me through to the cutoff, but it didn’t get all that much better.

    Mostly I didn’t really have much interest in the combat style, which didn’t leave much left.

  118. Bassem says:

    Because the demo didn’t impress me. The controls were floaty, the combat was… yeah, floaty. It was all floaty. The inventory management was a bit annoying as well. I honestly don’t remember much other than I really disliked the controls, and once my character made it out of the starting area and the game world became available to me (for 45 minutes, because demo) I didn’t feel like playing on, and exited and uninstalled.

    I’ve recently reinstalled the demo to have another go and actually check out the world. Controls and combat are a major deal breaker, though, so I may very well not last this time either.

  119. Hmm-Hmm. says:

    I quite liked it and ended up putting a lot of hours into it. But it’s hardly perfect and I kind of struggle to find what it is that made me spend so much time with it. It’s probably the combat and the atmosphere of the world. The fact that you can generally go where you wish. And the storyline is decent enough for me.

  120. F3ck says:

    Here’s what went wrong for Amalur:

    This game was too vast (there is a shit-load of content, especially with the DLCs) for those not accustomed/inclined to play RPGs…

    …however it seems to be designed with precisely those casual gamers in mind; very simple (but satisfying) combat, easy crafting, straightforward missions – so there goes the hard-core RPG crowd, too much hand-holding for them…

    …so Wow already got the money of the ones this game might appeal to, the rest went to Skyrim…

    …shame too. I liked this game as much as Walker does – but he too will almost certainly hit the wall eventually…

    …I’m guessing about 3/4 – 4/5 through when the armor and weapons are as good as they’re going to get and he’s become an unstoppable death-machine.

  121. naetharu says:

    Personally I was really not impressed by this game. I picked it up last summer and was looking forward to playing it. However it really failed to keep my attention.

    I found the quests were very generic – they never drew me in and I found myself being given busy work for no reason. I would describe it as the offspring of the worst bits of a Fable game mixed in with Vanilla WoW.

    Skyrim on the other hand has kept me going for over 400 hours so far, and I forsee many hundreds more before I finally tire of that world.

  122. LuNatic says:

    The combat was good. The crafting was good. I liked the aesthetic.

    The story was unimmersive, uninspiring and uninteresting. The lack of consequences for choices and actions killed my suspension of disbelief(Hey, you completed that quest and now you are the Grand High Whatsit of (insert faction here). In order to honour this grand achievement, a few NPCs will have a slightly different greeting voiceover, and… absolutely nothing. Those sworn enemies of our faction will treat you just the same as if you never joined us, and you will not gain any reward beyond the standard quest shinies.). Any sense of choice or risk was utterly removed by the instant character respecs.

    Basically, give me this engine, graphics, even this same basic setting but have story written by whoever wrote Mask of the Betrayer, and it would’ve been my game of the year. As it was, I played 40 hours and will likely never touch it again.

  123. Sesskie says:

    I actually played Amalur, for a few hours. The combat was fun, the setting and lore was interesting, but you know where they lost me? When they started giving me quests to go kill 5 deer and gather 7 herbs. If I wanted to play an MMO I’d go chose any of the other ten alternatives out there.

  124. Xantonze says:

    For people eager to try the game but afraid of the lack of challenge:
    “youngneil” created a mod increasing the difficulty (it also slightly increases game speed).

    You can find the mod, along with explanations, here:

    https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fmftcephsxvn83e/-mRiTE9kgV

  125. Morte66 says:

    Not sure if there’s much point replying to a 12 hour old thread around here, but…

    * Watches the advert video linked by RPS and replies based on that *

    I read the words “action RPG” rather than “RPG” and that pretty much ended it.

    Also, I remember when Black Isle closed down there was a retrospective on GameSpy. It mentioned Fallout and noted one of its strengths as “it finished before you got bored with it”. It seems to me this is a lost art in the world of exploration/sandbox RPGs. I’m very leery of any RPG that uses “huge” and “exploration” as selling points these days.

    One thing about Amalur-per-the-advert that does intrigue me is the suggestion that it might have sidequests with some real susbstance, beyond the “clear this dungeon” you normally get in MMOs or sandboxes. Sidequests as Bioware would define them, not Bethesda. {edit} But, reading a few comments inthis thread, it seems the advert is a pack of lies and it’s just filler.

  126. TheMopeSquad says:

    Man its disappointing hearing so much negativity about this game. I really loved it. It felt like a casual Elder Scrolls game, and for me it was much much more enjoyable than Skyrim (and Oblivion for that matter).

    Part of why I enjoyed it was because you could really see they wanted it to be the start of a solid franchise. I respected a lot of the design choices and the amount of sheer lore and content they had put into the game and felt that, fleshed out, this could be something really great. Of course we all know how that turned out.

    • F3ck says:

      No question the game was fun (for the 25 or so hours I played, anyway) especially the combat; the chakrams alone made mid-ranged scraps particularly enjoyable.

      Personally [not to disagree, but] I find comparisons to games like Skyrim impertinent, as there are really only similarities on paper. Yes, they both have an inventory/upgrade mechanic, save the world quest, and elves – but I found the two games very dissimilar.

      In fact, the only way they were exactly alike (for me) is both were immensely enjoyable for a period, but lost my interest prior to completion.

  127. Deadite says:

    I quite enjoyed the demo and bought the game, but it felt too much like grindy MMO in singleplayer and some terrible voice acting put me right off it. Just could not get into it.

    Grand total time played: 5 hours.

  128. Cunning Linguist says:

    These words must be banned from video games:
    -Chronicles
    -Kingdom
    -Reckoning
    -Scrolls
    -Guild
    -WAR, and any word containing this word, such as “warfighter” “warwhore” , and even “warts” or “warthog”.

  129. terry says:

    I’ve been playing this on and off since it went on sale over November and finding it painfully hard to like. The writing isn’t awful but boy oh boy is it wordy and unengaging most of the time. The environments are beautiful but feel very empty and streamlined to funnel you around like a pinball between dungeons. It’s like an MMO with a low server population, which makes sense given its development process.

  130. ratache says:

    Went into a building. Ran about, went upstairs, the geometry on the second floor didn’t correspond with the geometry of the first floor. One of many reason I got terribly disappointed by this game.

    • Kadayi says:

      Pretty much true of every building in Skyrim tbh. Also the Witcher 2 is full of two storey buildings with seemingly no staircases half the time.

  131. Jericho One says:

    I downloaded the Demo on Xbox around the time it was released and enjoyed it, though it did have a few issues. I had sooo many other games to complete I figured I would purchase it once these were out of the way (I know right? what kind of gamer am I??). So I actually went hunting for this in store last week – no sign of it anywhere for the Xbox Grrrr. Order online? I live in Dubai – that rarely works. The hunt goes on.

    Matt
    Tabletop news :) http://www.clashofechoes.com

  132. innokenti says:

    Picked it up on release, never regretted it. Brilliant little gem. Flawed, but fantastic.

  133. dawnmane says:

    Lovedlovedloved it. Played all the DLC. The game’s art style was really deceiving in being so similar to WoW, because the writing was actually on par with Bioware og CD Projekt RED.

    • Jericho One says:

      Considering Todd McFarlane was involved in the design/art direction, I was surprised it wasn’t a whole lot darker in it’s style. I’m looking forward to picking it up, especially after reading this.

  134. MerseyMal says:

    I picked it up with the DLC for about £27 last April and rather enjoyed it. According to Raptr I’ve put about 65 hours into it so far.

  135. Sparkasaurusmex says:

    I found Amalur to be a lot like Dungeon Siege III, but without the multiplayer.
    Amalur just feels generic and a huge let down after all the hype surrounding it’s story.

  136. JackShandy says:

    Well, in part because the RPS review said stuff like

    “…an abyss of trad fantasy wibbling. The immutable weight of that stuff soon smothers any clever intention that the story might have held.”

  137. distantlurker says:

    Bloody opinion pieces, making me buy stuff *mumble* *mumble* well I hope you’re proud of yourself Walker! I picked it up at lunchtime for the telly-box dust gatherer, just to spite you. Ha!

  138. Walf says:

    THQ seemed to be cursed with a lot of games people overlooked. I think Titanquest suffered the same fate also.

    That said, this was a pretty great game. My only complaint is that it did at times feel like it was meant to be an MMO, so you had these vast, unpopulated areas that were just empty as hell. The combat was fun though and the plot was rather fascinating too. Though I must admit I was tired of elfy elf elves at this point, and the game really hits you over the head with Amalur’s elf story. I guess it’s just a thing tha R.A. Salvatore does though. Elfy elves being elfy

  139. UnlovedAlien says:

    I have to admit all the people on here stating that the combat, skill trees and writing were what put them off and then saying that they preferred Skyrim makes me chuckle

    • jrodman says:

      To be fair, in Amalur I was moderately intrested until i got to the demo timer and started getting a sense of the mmo-quest type feel, while in Skyrim I didn’t even finish the tutorial.

  140. Jad says:

    For me the answer is simple: incredibly poor timing following Skyrim.

    I know that a number of people in the gaming press were saying that this should not be an issues, as Amalur was released a couple of months later, but they play games for a living, and were more able to put in the 100+ hours required to enjoy that game in a few weeks.

    I played Skyrim for 120+ hours. At the end of last year I was thinking about my games of the year and I went into my saved game folder to see what I had played in 2012. According to the timestamps, it took me from November 2011 to May 2012 to get those 120 hours. I did take breaks in there to play short indie games and action games (I think I played through MW3 one weekend afternoon), but Skyrim was my primary game for the first third of the year. I had no time for another long-form, multi-week RPG for a long time following Skyrim.

    In fact, I have been finding myself more and more avoiding any long games, I actually welcome how short modern games have become, because I now have a chance of finishing them. I will still play a long game, but the bar for me has to be exceptionally higher, and from reviews Amalur did not seem to reach the necessary level of quality for me to devote my energy towards playing it.

    A few days ago I finally forced myself to play Thirty Flights of Loving, and it’s true, it really only took 45 minutes for me to play through it twice (second time with commentary). Of course, that was the only game playing I was able to do that night, but in that time I was able to complete a whole game, a whole interesting, different experience. I’m sure there are single fetch quests in Amalur that take longer.

  141. Snargelfargen says:

    7 pages of comments and running, wow. My takeaway from this is

    -Generic fantasy storylines are becoming less palatable. Either gamers are simply weary of them or there are marginally better options available.

    -There’s a disconnect between how people judge MMOs and solo RPGs despite the genres sharing similiar mechanics. Amalur wore that comparison on it’s sleeve and the result was a condemnation of MMO gameplay rather than a critique of rpgs in general.

    -Skyrim is uncool now.

  142. gingerbill says:

    The game is massive , it’s very open , has good combat and i enjoyed it at the start . The problem is the world is dull , the quests are dull , it’s just dull and generic . They got Salvatore to do the writing and the writing and story are the weakest part of the game by a mile . It’s a shame as a lot of work must have gone into the game . Salvatore hasnt written a good book for a long long long time , just generic childish stuff , this game is no different.

    Of course it didnt help i had just sunk 150 hours into skyrim , skyrim is just simply better , though alamur has better combat. This game feels like an MMO world , everything is to generic.

    I would still say its worth getting for cheap as there’s some fun to be had.

  143. Megakoresh says:

    This is one of my favourite videogames ever.
    It has the best open world ever created in videogames, which is why I loved it so much. It’s downside what the main quest and characters which were remedied in both of it’s amazing DLC.

    It has the most believable, the most charming Open World, with every tiniest side-character, every settlement having a reactive, unique and interactive story than has never been seen in any other game before. The combat was more of an icing on the cake. It is really great, but can get frustrating because of it’s less-than-ideal (to say the least) dodging.

    Reckoning is a game to model others from. Especially when creating an Open World. I NEVER have been so taken by the game’s world itself, by sidequests, by settlements and secondary characters, as I have in Reckoning. It is the only EA game I would recommend buying right now. This game is a true masterpiece, it is truly unique and sadly I doubt that anything like it will be done in the near future.

  144. Num1d1um says:

    Skyrim didn’t even have a demo as far as I recall.

  145. simulant says:

    I played it when it came out and really enjoyed it. I did not notice many bugs.
    Combat is way more fun than Skyrim.

  146. Devilturnip says:

    At the risk of the arbiters of what constitutes a good game here in the comments jumping all over me… I agree with John. It’s a good game.

  147. Tuco says:

    Actually, I did.
    it sucked.

  148. xao says:

    I picked it up at release, enjoyed it for a few days, but ultimately the combat drove me away from it. KoA wants to be a role-playing game with action-game combat, but it doesn’t do either aspect particularly well. The combat looks pretty, but the system doesn’t hold up on higher difficulty levels. Lengthy combat animations combined with an inability to cancel rendered a great deal of the possibilities moot. Combat turned into a “farm for fate, instakill boss” affair.

    Not being a Salvatore fan, I didn’t expect much from the writing, so I wasn’t terribly disappointed. The quests felt largely like standard MMO fare, though at least a few had lasting repercussions on your world. Neither the questing nor the writing was enough to overcome the mediocrity and eventual boredom of the combat system.

    On the upside, it lead me to look into RPGs with good combat, which lead to Dark Souls. Hurrah!

  149. derella says:

    I played the demo on PC, and wasn’t overly impressed. I also played it at a friends house on 360, and after a few hours lost interest. It just never grabbed me in any way.

    The world and characters seemed generic, and the art direction was… weird. I dunno, I love stylized art, but it felt like it was trying, but ended up looking garish. The quests were felt like they were ripped from a MMO(kill 3 bandit leaders! collect 6 crates of goods!).

    Despite that, I felt like I was on the verge of getting passed the blah parts… but it never happened. If it ever goes on sale for like $14.99, I’ll probably try again.

  150. TheGameSquid says:

    Basically what all the others have said: the graphics are very mediocre with a supergeneric art style, the story is incredibly weak from the get-go, combat feels like a beat-em-up and not particularly deep or interesting, the game is structured like an MMO and its quests feel very much like they were taken from one. I really don’t think the game has a SINGLE standout feature…

    If you can get it for 15$, it can be a pretty fun game, but all in all it’s very expensive while not really scratching the itches of a person interested in deep RPGs.

  151. kazriko says:

    I did play it. It was in my top 5 for games I finished in 2012.

    I didn’t have any of the bugs you mention when I played it on PS3.

  152. iivo says:

    Bugs – i can live with those. Skyrim had it’s share.
    The game had two major problems:
    It had grinding – something you really do not need in Single-player, especially at the beginning. i understand farming for an item, but classic grinding… no.
    And the second, and IMHO the worst problem: It was so unbelievably easy. I mean by the time you had your second specialization (character card, or whatever), you could plow through caves/area with barely a scratch. it was simply boring.
    I am very sorry about it, i was looking with very high hopes towards it (action-like combat with RPG location, story, lore, skills, everything). It should have been a recipe for success, even with Skyrim near.
    Unfortunately, no matter how good looking a cake, no matter what fancy ingredients it has, if it just doesn’t taste at all, you really don’t eat it.

  153. Flank Sinatra says:

    I played this game for a good while when it came out. Great combat and gameplay. I loved the heck out of it until I got halfway through the game I realized just how big and empty it was. The zones really did feel like running around an MMO world with no other players. It felt lonely. I think Amalur drove me to play an MMO instead and I gave it up.

    Also: I keep thinking back on Amalur and confusing it with memories of Darksiders 2.

  154. Cunning Linguist says:

    Played it last night for 2-3 hours. I don’t like the art style or the UI. The combat seems good so far but may not hold out later in the game . I think the consensus is correct that KoA is too bland to stand out. But , since I love console action-RPGs I’ll probably play through some more of it at some point.

    • baguafox says:

      Give the combat system a few hours to flush out.. Once you unlock special/blocking moves plus magic it becomes incredibly dynamic

  155. baguafox says:

    First, like to say long time reader first time commenting!!! After reading the story I decided to just go on faith and buy it two days ago… Already 17 hours in and cannot stop playing it…. After school, work, grading, and research I am still up until 4 or 5am playing this damn game! Combat is some of the best I have ever seen (btw…been playing all forms of RPGs since mid-1980s), and the world is amazing to explore!!! Thank you for pointing to this… Totally grateful to see such a nice and thoughtful expose. btw… I found it on the US version of Amazon for 30$, which is a great price for such a good game.

  156. slimcarlos says:

    like Marvin implied I cant believe that a mother able to earn $8413 in 4 weeks on the computer. have you read this web link http://www.pie21.com

  157. JimmyWild says:

    For me it got lost in the mix with so many other titles i was trying to play. I probably played 5-6 hours. Liked it, but was drawn to something else. But i’m in catch up mode right now and this article reminded me to play it lol. So i’ll start it over once i finish FFXIII-2. :)

  158. Branthog says:

    I haven’t bought it or played it, because it has a hideously generic art-style and everyone’s description of the game itself is that it is a fine-enough, but sparse, generic RPG. Everything I ever saw of it felt like a mix of WoW and a mix of thirteen-year old boy’s masturbatory big-sword and barrel-chest fantasy. It’s the same reason I won’t play Crysis 3, frankly — too generic looking to appeal to me. I wouldn’t play Amalur if it were free.

  159. kdz says:

    Well, I did play it for about 30 hours. Admittedly in a bit of a rush, because I was meant to review the game for a (Polish) gaming website.
    And the thing is: it felt sterile. You are IN the world, but never a part of it. It felt like rooms with a nice wallpaper, nothing more. No verticality, no interesting traversal options, just running towards the next objective, slashing some dudes and so on.
    Also: it tried to incorporate a lot of things from games that are currently on top and just failed because no thought was given to such inspiration. It has the combat system of a God of War, but executing the hits just isn’t as satisfying, nor are the fights themselves interesting (mainly because of the open world, of course). There is the dialog wheel from Mass Effect, but I couldn’t figure out WHY. I mean: the wheel was fantastic in ME and Alpha Protocol because it was a way to quickly present the available options to the player so that he wouldn’t break the flow of the conversation reading all of the lines. But in Reckoning the main character isn’t voiced so there IS no flow. Oh, and sometimes instead of a wheel you get a classic window with lines. Why?
    Then there are the lorestones (or however they decided to call them), but there were problems with the volume of the speeches and you couldn’t turn the subtitles on for them. Nice. Oh, and let’s not forget the super-smart dialog. I once used the art of persuasion on a prince who didn’t want to help me in a war effort. How did I do that? By saying to him “Give me an army”. Seriously.
    All of those things turned Reckoning – which’s launch I was genuinly waiting for, hoping for some deep character customization and an interesting world – into a disappointment.
    :<

  160. Reverend Lovebutter says:

    I’ll try to archive this review and comment thread for later review and dark brooding.

    I was lead designer on Morrowind and Oblivion… love the Elder Scrolls. And Executive Design Director on Reckoning.

    For me, Reckoning was a chance to have more fun per unit time than in an Elder Scrolls game, with a combat system that was designed for a console and game controller, fast and easy to play, but fun, colorful cheap-and-cheerful FRP gameplay like you’d have around a D&D table.

    Elder Scrolls is always fulfilling for me… but not really ‘fun’. A lot of time and grind, walking and talking, long, awkward dialog, inventory cluttered with junk. Totally immersive and satisfying. But a Very Heavy Meal.

    It will always be a mystery to me why Reckoning didn’t find its audience.

    I’ve read all the negative comments above. I hear them, even if it’s often hard to understand them except as obscure expressions of personal taste.

    But I think John Walker’s review best catches an appropriate sense of ‘this could have been so much more… but it’s still a boatload of fun, and fun you won’t find anywhere else.”

    You may notice that Reckoning was the only original new AAA IP in 2012.

    New IP is hard. Marketing and publicity will be hard. And people who already have other favorites will just go play their favorites. That’s fair. Not a lot of novelty or variety in our brand of entertainment right now. But people like what they’re used to. New IP is a HUGE risk. Andhuge risks often don’t work.

    I wish we’d had a chance to make Reckoning 2.

    I wish we’d released in a season without competing RPG… like Arena did when it first released. But even Morrowind had to release opposite Neverwinter Nights, which was a killer Bioware competitor in those days.

    And if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

    One tip for Reckoning players?

    Here’s how I best liked to play. For fun. to hell with quests and completionism.

    Reckoning: Exploration Survival Mode:
    - Never accept or complete a quest.
    - Never buy gear or sell gear at a store.
    - Live only on what you can harvest from kills.
    And… then? Head out for the farthest eastern edge of the map.

    The enemies get tougher and tougher the farther you go from the start point. Pretty soon it gets hard, then Real Hard, then Desperately Hard, to kill anything and harvest loot… unless you used your combat skill, resources, and tactical problem-solving just right. But the combat is just so much fun, you play it as a giant extended sequence of combat matches… you against a world full of enemies! I just went as far as I could go, hit a brink wall, then gave up. And… after a while… started all over again, later, with a new character concept. Rinse. Repeat.

    I also recommend the two expansions, which are way more coherent and elegant than any Bioware or Bethsoft DLC. Oodles of polished, intelligent, colorful content.

    But thanks, John, for opening the game and finding the fun. And thanks all commentators, negative, positive, ambivalent. This will make for great review and reflection in an idle hour, looking back at all we tried to do in Reckoning.

    Me? I’m still hugely proud of Reckoning, and all my awesome Bug Huge friends who did the actual geniusing and laboring to make Reckoning. And to EA Partners, who by the way, did an AWESOME job of marketing and publicity. Given the scale of our challenge, releasing against Mass Effect 3 and Skyrim, and loads of other fine sequels that season, they did a great job. AND they helped us release a demo… an overwhelming challenge for a new, small RPG studio which had never released a console game before. You’re entitled to your opinions, but I know my profession, and those guys did stellar work against terrific odds.

    To everyone: just open the game, and look for the fun. If you can’t afford the full game, there’s PLENTY of gameplay in the demo.

    Yes. And there are some bugs in the demo, but they seem to hit some folks hard, and some folks never at all. And, lordy, compared to Morrowind? Which had relatively few bugs for such a HUMONGOUS OCEAN of software… but which had far more bugs than the Reckoning demo. [There's a dev-saavy, counter-intuitive reason why the demo had more bugs than the final release of the full game. Which I'll save for some future exposition.]

    And bugs in the complete game? Well, Reckoning was certainly FAR FAR FAR more bug free than Skyrim on release. In particular, on PS3. C’mon. Seriously. I understand if you tolerate floods of bugs if you love Elder Scrolls games. Heaven knows, I do; Skyrim was well worth the risk of occasional bugs and wonkiness. But I wouldn’t pretend it was flawless, polished software. ['How soon they forget.' *Taking deep breath. Relaxing.*]

    Really. Thanks, everyone. It why I religiously read RPS. And regularly review comments with interest.

    Now. [Scratching head.]

    How the hell do you archive an entire article with all its comments?

    [*Wandering off on a Power-User Quest.*]

    • Snargelfargen says:

      It’s super exciting to read a post from the lead of two of my favourite games ever!

      Regarding Reckoning, sometimes I think a AAA game’s reception suffers not because of difficulty finding an audience, but because aiming for something new within a genre also runs the risk of disappointing expectations for the established conventions of that genre. It sounds like the action-oriented pick up and play approach was interpreted as poor design when really your team was just trying to provide a different experience. Another example I remember is Dead Space which got a lot of flack for clumsy and slow controls back in the day. Bad things in an fps, but common tools in horror games. The latest Hitman is getting similiar press as a terrible Hitman sequel and decent game, although it’s still selling ok. I guess I’m getting awfully close to saying obnoxious things like “it’s not that kind of game” or “people just aren’t playing it right” but there it is.

      I agree with your opinion of the TES experience, if I had to sum it up in one word, it would be “arduous”. I’ve spent countless hours in Morrowind, Oblivion and also Skyrim and while they are incredibly rewarding, reduce those games to less than the sum of their parts and you get a lot of very grindy actions. And the bugs. Oh, the bugs… Agreeing with the lead developer of said games on this is hella weird btw.

      Anyways, you’ve sold me on the “more fun unit per time” line. I’ll definitely be trying Amalur the next chance I get, and I’ll give your “challenge mode” a shot too. Thanks for the info-dump, it was fascinating, and I hope you go on to work on more exciting projects.

      p.s. any hints what that next project might be?

      Edit for TOUGH JOURNALISM question, now that I’m done gushing:
      Amalur’s storytelling and world seemed very generic fantasy fare which was a turn-off for a lot of people including me.
      How exactly did that happen? Was a standard fantasy world always the plan? Does the game’s world and story have something unique that just wasn’t transmitted, and if so, why?

      • Reverend Lovebutter says:

        Genres exist because folks like familiar elements. Westerns have saloon doors and hitching posts. It’s how you USE those elements that counts.

        Did you play the House of Ballads faction? That’s a particular model of good narrative quest design and writing. And both the expansions get other awesome stuff.

        Familiar epic main quests and narrative themes are bread-and-butter. Look to the corners and side quests for color and strange fruit.

        But, that said, Reckoning innovates in action RPG combat… not in narrative presentation or gameplay. I’d love to innovate in ALL game elements at once! Art for art’s sake!

        But… try to Do Too Much when making a new FRP experience with a new IP and a team that’s never made a console game?

        Wo, dude. First Rule of AA Game Development: Don’t do too much, and polish what you do.

  161. SeismicRend says:

    I agree with many who felt the game was too easy making it disengaging. The ‘Street Fighter’ combo complexity of the combat is lost when you can spam a single attack. With a little moderation, you can get a lot more enjoyment out of the game.

    I would recommend avoiding the crafting and reckoning elements if you would like the game to be remotely engaging. Like Skyrim, crafting makes you overpowered to the point of invincibility and makes loot rewards junk. Also, while the reckoning activation is cool, it makes bosses trivial. I would recommend not using it either for boss fights.

    Potions are another element that don’t mesh well either. I recommend getting HP regen on your gear to keep you topped off between fights and avoid spamming HP pots as a crutch.

    It also helps to be mindful of how the level scaling works in the game. The level of the zone is set based on when you first enter an area so avoid entering a new zone unless you intend on exploring and questing in it. If you come back to it later at a higher level, it’ll be irrelevant.

    Finally, the rogue level 1 fan of knives ability (I don’t recall the exact name) is extremely broken because every knife in the attack can hit large targets at once, one shotting them. Don’t put more than one point into it.

    Honestly, I don’t know why action-adventure games tack on RPG elements to them. It creates a plethora of balance issues unless carefully managed.

  162. benkc says:

    I realize this thread is old, but I picked it up this weekend, and felt like recording my thoughts so far.

    I’m constantly fighting the camera during combat. I haven’t figured out what logic it uses to decide what crazy things it’s going to do with the camera; at times it will ignore the enemies I’m fighting, the direction I’m moving, anything I do with my mouse, or all of the above. This really kills any possibility of enjoying the combat for me.

    Given how the game initially seemed to favor dodging, I was really disappointed to realize that missile attacks are homing. Also, while this is maybe something I just need more practice with, the fact that attack-windup-signal-animations do NOT mean it’s time to dodge was really frustrating. (If you dodge during the windup, they instantly adjust and hit you. I believe you have to dodge after they’ve already started swinging.)

    I specced daggers/stealth, and was really disappointed that with stealth maxed out (for the low levels) I still can hardly ever sneak up on anything, because they’re always in groups that are facing every which way.

    There’s lots of lack of polish. The lorestones are a neat idea, but the subtitles are grossly out-of-sync with the voice on most of them, and the voice is too quiet to hear over any action if you keep moving. Characters lips will randomly stop moving for a few lines of dialog. I’m constantly getting stuck on tiny rocks and roots, which really changes the feeling from “this is an open world” to “this is a fancied-up corridor”. (Not being able to jump except for at very specific points also contributes a lot to that.) You can’t set multiple quests to show up on the map, and you can’t toggle back and forth between the map and quest log. (Given the above comments about zones setting their level when you first enter them, it seems very important not to go on to the next zone if you still plan to do anything in this one.) Every time I go into the “Moves” screen, it’s re-un-folded every weapon type, which is a pain if you want something that’s a ways down. There’s no tooltips on items — you have to right-click, pop-up menu, then “inspect” or “compare”. The book-reading UI is tiny. For the matter, the window that describes skills over on the right is tiny, and doesn’t scroll very well. The menus in general feel very “we designed this for a console, and didn’t put any effort into making it make sense for KB/M”. (The fact that lots of other games these days have that same problem does not in any way excuse it in any of them.)

    Then there’s a lot of delays that make me wonder if it’s just not running correctly. The timing on ward dispelling is off — I have to click slightly after the circle passes the ward. Loot doesn’t show up on corpses until several seconds after you’ve killed the last monster in the area — so I often don’t even see some of the loot. When you try to talk to someone, you’ll often be stuck there for a few seconds while they slowly turn towards you or stand up, before the dialog opens up. Maybe this stuff also ties in to my earlier-mentioned problems with combat timing.

    The most damning, though, is that every time I fire it up, it’s not very long before I find myself wanting to play either a TES game or WoW instead. (I haven’t wanted to play WoW in *years*!) It just feels like it’s a mix of both of those, but less fun than either. (How can the combat manage to be less fun than THOSE games?!)

    FWIW, I thought the Fae-story-cycle thing was interesting, or what I’ve seen of it so far. That’s part of why I keep launching the game, even though I keep quitting after not very long.

    Postscript: I grabbed the complete pack, because that’s what I do. Is one of these DLC packs seriously just a complete set of auto-levelling gear? That doesn’t add content — that removes content! I am seriously cheesed by this.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      You can remedy the camera issue by using an FOV fixer like Widescreen Fixer, something I found totally necessary in order to tolerate KoA’s gameplay. I highly suggest you download it and try it out.

      As far as the rest of your concerns, the majority of them are issues endemic to the RPG genre — pathfinding issues, combat mechanics, synching glitches, collision detection, UI, etc. It’s funny that you mentioned the TES series, because those games in particular have severe problems with collision and character movement.

      The DLC pack that contains the gear sets? Just don’t use those items, problem solved.

      I’m not saying your complaints are unjustified, but it almost reads like you went into this game expecting to be disappointed. That’s not surprising given the amount of public vitriol it attracts from RPG diehards.

  163. bjkgamer says:

    game is easy, repetitive and is too similar to other rpgs, thus being released at the same time as a repetitive game that has a ridiculous amount of fame and stuff in it makes it not sell very well… they made it such a mind numbing game you dont even have to lock on to targets yourself, my brain literally feels like its melting whenever i touch the game, i remember a part of the quest when i had to read something… i was like.. really ?? ive been playing with my eyes closed for so long i cant be bothered to focus on some text… i need darksouls 2 or dragons dogma 2 or a good rpg to quench my thirst….

    rant rant rant..

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Respond to our gibber

Read our finest words

The Flare Path: Elegant Elefanticide

Search for clues

Browse the archive