• ninjinx - February 1, 2012 12:58 p.m.

    Doesn't matter, had skyrim.
  • garnsr - February 1, 2012 12:23 p.m.

    I didn't like the UI in the Amalur demo very much. I also didn't like the UI in Skyrim very much. It would be nice to get new weapons all the time, but it's kind of nice in Skyrim when you can just get a weapon, smith it up, and not have to worry about checking everything you come across looking for something better. I liked the Amalur demo enough to keep it in mind for someday. It seems more like Fable to me than Elder Scrolls. I'm not sure I want more fantasy adventure right now, after just finishing up 150 hours of Skyrim, but if it ends up being good enough I'd sure look into it after playing El Shaddai and Shadows of the Damned, which I just got pretty cheap from Amazon.
  • Stabby_Joe - February 1, 2012 12:07 p.m.

    Despite all of this I'm still probably not going to be as immersed than I am in Skyrim. In fact I wouldn't even bother comparing the two. Instead I'm hoping this game is a more polished Two Worlds II.
  • BladedFalcon - February 1, 2012 11:54 a.m.

    I think I do agree that all those things are done better in Amalur. The combat, specially, while I don't think is THAT deep or great, (and certainly not really up to par with proper action games.) it at least offer more challenge and variety than skyrim's. Which really, the combat there boils down to, "mash attack button, get damaged, pause, use potions, mash some more." this is exacerbated more by the fact that the enemy AI's tactic is always the same: they go straight for the attack, they don't flank, hide, or take cover. Skyrim did it's exploration great, but combat really was not one of those things. Or challenge in general, thanks to be able to pussy out and lower the difficulty any time you want.
  • Travia220 - February 1, 2012 12:08 p.m.

    Skyrim had no challenge. Bethesda screwed up mechanics so bad and the ability to get Daedric significantly easier than even previous games. Walk to Gloombound Mine and you almost have fifty pieces of Ebony. Combine that with how easy it is to reach 100Smithing+Enchanting+Alchemy.. and you've got yourself an instantly overpowered character that can destroy pretty much any obstacle.
  • Ravenbom - February 1, 2012 11:45 a.m.

    You're probably right, HoCo, but the Fus Ro Dah is what makes combat great for any class in Skyrim.
  • BluegrassSmoker - February 1, 2012 11:41 a.m.

    The 'mod' Skyrim argument holds little weight IMO in these kind of arguments. You shouldn't have to mod a game to fix glitches that should have never got thru. Yes yes you can't fix everything, I know this. but here's an example. I have over 65+ weight in misc finished quest items I can't drop because It says 'you can't drop quest items' yet said quest is in my finished quest list. I wouldn't mind if it was one or two items but 65+ weight. Fucking retarded. For those who play Skyrim on a console, we still have to deal with the retarded glitches that can seriously break the game. So for console players, Skyrim isn't the god of games. /insert all the 'well play skyrim on a PC you fucktard comments/ I love Skyrim but I seriously dislike Bethesda. It's sad to see the same type of glitches that were in the Fallout series. Game breaking glitches. I'm excited for this game. While the demo was kinda Meh. Salvatore is one of my favorite authors so I'm on board.
  • yasmarc - February 1, 2012 11:39 a.m.

    This demo felt like I was playing a single player WoW clone with voiceovers. Talent trees - Check (Yes so did Skyrim, but more than 3......) Quest givers with ! and ? over their heads - Check Instanced dungeons - Check Green/Purple/Gold gear ratings - Check Graphics - Lol check Combat - Check (Hit this ability over and over! Ok now hit this one to finish off!) I know it has a lot more going for it than not but it was waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to linear to keep boasting about how deep it is. I think I've finally played too many RPG's like this to get excited.
  • Travia220 - February 1, 2012 12:04 p.m.

    Talent Trees - Long before WoW's time. Strike 1. Quest Givers - /shrug Instanced Dungeons - Clearly you don't know what instanced means. Skyrim has these as well. Strike 2. Colour Variations - Long Before WoW. Strike 3. Graphics - Someones mixing up graphics with aesthetics. Combat - The games have completely different combat mechanics. Skyrim you also just hit the same thing over and over..! Uncanny similarities. Also WoW has no "Finishers." Your points are utterly ridiculous and really don't deserve a response but I felt like doing it anyway. Clearly you've never played WoW or you are trolling. Also the game is in no way linear. You can go where you want, do what quests you want, kill what you want and do whatever you want. It's exploration is not as open as Skyrims, however it is an Open World RPG. You haven't played many RPG's like this except for Elder Scrolls and Fallout games. Because there are not many Open World Games.
  • yasmarc - February 2, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    So since something was similar before it that disproves the point? Right, anyway this demo felt like I was back playing a rogue in WoW (you know, the class with FINISHERS HERP DERP!). Skyrim's dungeons aren't instanced, they are just different loaded areas. Nothing respawns in there for another go. This game is getting a lot of press for doing absolutely nothing we haven't all done before is all. The fact is that if I was playing it on a keyboard instead of a controller it played exactly like a 7 year old game.
  • gobble412 - February 1, 2012 11:33 a.m.

    Doesn't matter. Skyrim was a disappointment anyway. They tried to make it too big - all that came out of this was a sacrifice of all of the wonderful stories that made Morrowind and Oblivion masterpieces. Yes, the generic-ness of the dungeons was done away with and the combat was improved, but that's really all it did right. Everything I ever did in Morrowind or Oblivion felt meaningful, and the stories were so engaging that I felt the need to finish EVERY SINGLE QUEST. Almost everything I do in Skyrim feels fairly minuscule and unimportant. The characters aren't nearly as intriguing, and I just don't find myself caring about what goes on in the world around me. I haven't even picked up Skyrim since December, but I'll finish it eventually. Just saddens me that Bethesda neglected the main thing that made TES awesome for me.
  • Havikinazuma - February 19, 2012 6:13 p.m.

    i feel that Skyrim wasn't a disappointment. Though different from Marrowind and Oblivion (Which i enjoyed a lot), Skyrim has key components that keeps me interested. Such as Shouts, finishers, Dragons, Treatments of skills, and marriage. Though i find the marriage in the game, loveless. i go out on quest, she set up shop. i come back with nothing for her, and i take her money and food she makes me. totally loveless,IMO. But i love the game and would glady add it to the family of TES's. XD
  • Zeipher - February 1, 2012 11:03 a.m.

    Fanboys crack me up! "THERE CAN BE NO FAULTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!" "FUCKINGGGGG DEMOSSSSSSSS!!!!" "FREEDOMMMMMMM!" Lol, he didn't say it was a better game, jeez
  • Havikinazuma - February 19, 2012 6:17 p.m.

    we know. We read it. thank you
  • db1331 - February 1, 2012 10:52 a.m.

    I was really unimpressed with the demo. The combat and camera were pretty clunky, the menus were poorly designed (made for a controller and not a mouse), and everything looked really, REALLY low resolution. I know they have come out and said the demo was old code and not indicative of the final release build, but damn. You have to wonder how much of it is actually improved upon in the full release. I'm certainly not going to spend $60 to find out. As soon as I made it through the tutorial and they plopped me out into the world and told me I had 45 minutes to explore, I turned it off and haven't been back. Obviously it's no Skyrim, but if you are going to call your game an open world RPG and ask $60 for it, you're going to invite a ton of comparison. Would you really recommend a friend buy Amalur over Skyrim if they could only choose one?
  • babyhenchy1 - February 1, 2012 11:51 a.m.

    Well to be fair, that was months old demo that was built up by a third-party company. EA wanted a demo and 38 Studios didn't feel they had the time to make it so they handed it off. Schilling has acknowledged this and apologized for the poor state of it. The game still has some great ideas that if done right will make for a really good game.
  • babyhenchy1 - February 1, 2012 11:52 a.m.

    Don't acknowledge my last post, somehow I didn't see you acknowledge their acknowledgement of the demo. ACKNOWLEDGE
  • db1331 - February 1, 2012 12:14 p.m.

  • babyhenchy1 - February 1, 2012 12:26 p.m.

    LOL But in all seriousness, I'm still quite excited. The lack of openness does concern me, especially with a game that's supposed to be about breaking destiny. But the unhindered character customization really has me excited.
  • HeavyTank - February 1, 2012 10:49 a.m.

    Maybe all these are true, but, as others have said, the issues in Skyrim can be fixed with mods, and frankly, Kingdoms isn't very good. The combat is alright, but the whole thing feels waaay too much like a console-adapted single-player MMO, if that makes any sense. Yes, I know that it was originally meant to be one, but that doesn't excuse the horrifyingly bad camera controls that look like they're MEANT to be used with dual sticks, the average voice acting, the dated graphics (First thing that popped into my mind: Guild Wars, and that's a four-year old MMORPG) and the whole..empty feel this has. There is a lot to explore, and the environments are creative enough, but..I just feel like there's no point. I just think that it would be better off as a DMC-GoW fantasy clone rather than an epic, open-world RPG.

Showing 81-100 of 119 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.