By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Kingdoms of Amalur: ohmygosh i didnt think it was that cool.

I played a little bit of it but ended up quitting. The gameplay was decent for a loot drop game, It added skill based combat to your average loot drop gameplay, but playing the game on normal it was just way too easy, the dialogue in the game was incredibly boring, so while I started to do quests at first, I eventually stopped doing quests and went on to do main story events. It got to the point where I was going from a to b to c and really was just running past enemies and ignoring everything around me to get there. Playing the game normally got so boring so I just started to rush through until I quit.

Coincidentally, despite the repetitive gameplay, there are your average loot drop games that I've been able to play to completion.  To me they were just more enjoyable progress through.



Around the Network

I hated it. Got it for free on PSN PLUS and did not enjoyed at all.

Feels too shallow, too "americanized", too crappy in every aspect of it. That said, RPGs are in steady decadence in general due to lack of faith of developers on gamers inteligence.

They fear we will run away screaming if anything makes us think, blame it on Call of Duty.



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

Yeah, after putting 364 hours in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, I had achieved all I wanted to achieve in that game. Yet at the same time I was still eager for a similar experience and to "get lost" in a fantastical setting with an avatar that could be molded by the player. So I picked up Dragon Age: Origins and Kingdoms of Amalur to get my epic quest WRPG fix.

Well suffice to say that I've now put in over 60 hours into KoA and I've already purchased The Legend of Dead Kel expansion and am planning on picking up The Teeth of Naros expansion as well. The game has really been a pleasant surprise and really gives me that post-Skyrim content I was looking for all while providing a fresh and unique experience.

Obviously, the game is going to be compared to Skyrim. It released within months of the game (big mistake on their part. They should have realized that TES players would be playing that game for months and months after its release) and shares a lot of the same gameplay elements that Skyrim offers (Big, explorable world. Moldable central protagonist. Diverse battle and overworld mechanics. Etc.). However, the game did enough to really carve out its own niche. First, and most important of all, is its combat mechanics. Can we all just say that Skyrim's combat wasn't its strong point? You just kind of hack and hack (or cast spell after spell) until your foe was vanquished. You had to create games within the game to make it an interesting part of the core experience (like say, making stealth an intrigal part of how you approached and dispatched each foe. Made things much more engaging.) Reckoning, on the other hand, employs a much more fluid and action oriented combat system that relies on player movement and chaining attacks with special attacks to defeat your foe. Skyrim was created with a first person view in mind (but kudos for allowing you to play in the 3rd person), and his hurt the character's ability to focus on precise and quick paced movement and combat, while Reckoning was created with a 3rd person view in mind, allowing it the ability to incorporate combat gameplay from action and action adventure titles.

Another thing that sets it apart is its art style. While Skyrim goes for the more realistic setting, Reckoning takes a much more colorful and stylistic approach. It's not cartoonish, but it uses the best points from that style to create a beautiful and eye catching world. It also offers diverse landscapes, from dense forests to arid desert landscapes, to rotting rainforests... and everything inbetween. I have to say that the northern plains of Erathell were just... beautiful. There were moments where I just stopped so I could take it all in. It really was a continual push for me to continue playing the game. The map style is definitely more linear and flat compared to Skyrim, which offered a giant plot of land with hills and mountains to traverse, but at the same time Reckoning offered a lot of diversity in the world you explored.

So while the main quest was bare bones and straight forward, it at least had the decency to not be a bloated and convoluted mess. My main complaint is that Reckoning, despite all of its quote trees and quests, offers little for the player to impact the world in any meaningful way. Even the faction quests were laughably black and while, either offering the "good" choice or the "evil" choice by the end of their storylines. The only one that offered an interesting twist was the "House of Valor" questline in where I sided with The Maid of Windermere as I sympathized with her entrapment in the endless cycle of forced villany, and where the "heroes" were only heroic because they knew they would prevail beforehand. But other than that the game offered very little that grabbed your attention from a story or character standpoint. Definitely the weakest point of the game.

Still, all in all I have to say that Kingdoms of Amalur offers great content with great combat and a fantastic art style. It's straightforward and unremarkable to a fault, but it still holds its own as a great game. Definiely recommended and I'm really happy I picked it up (Thanks Disolitude!). Speaking of which, the game is on sale on Steam for $5.99 so I can only recommend everyone to give it a try!



this is a title I wanted back as it played pretty good, I've got it on pc now dunno if il get time to play it



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

I got it on the Steam Sale as well. Amazing game



Around the Network
Nem said:
pokoko said:
It's a shame but the game was probably just too big and too ambitious. With a new IP, they probably should have scale things down by a good margin, established the franchise, then expanded with the sequel.

People always want to blame the "AAA model" for everything but with Kingdoms of Amalur, I think the studio itself bears most of the fault. Requiring three million copies sold just to break even is too much to ask with a new IP. I'm sure it's well over the 2M mark, which should be pretty good, just not when the game was this expensive to create.


That wasnt because of the single player game. It was because of the MMO they were developing sideways. The game was supposed (or so they hoped) to make them stay afloat for developing both.

Their plan was always to make an MMO. They made the single player game to recoup from the debt they were contracting.

I'm not sure what you mean.  I know the MMO has a lot to do with the studio going under but it's been said that Kingdoms of Amalur needed to sell three million copies for that game to break even.  It lost money, which certainly did not help the studio at all.



its a good game but the combat it's very repetitive. I'd give it a 8/10.



I played the demo and loved it. I ended up not getting it but something else instead caught my attention.

I might get this on Steam. My bro is nearly done with my pc... finally!



You guys are getting me hyped! I already bought it a couple days ago, but haven't gotten around to playing it yet. From what I've read here, I'll be sure to play it on hard. Actually, it looks like it's probably a good idea to play every game on hard these days.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnMeF5P_F4Y

nuff said. (i nerdgasm when doing that, lol.) hopefully youtube doesnt kill the audio

 

i agree that there's a lack of polish and the game tends to be a little too huge, but gameplay is nailed. :3



I'm a Foreigner, and as such, i am grateful for everyone pointing out any mistakes in my english posted above - only this way i'll be able to improve. thank you!