Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review

Back to Article


  • HeavyTank - February 7, 2012 5:15 a.m.

    All Skyrim-comparing aside, I couldn't get to care even a tiny bit about the story, and I didn't like the combat either (yes, I think Skyrim's combat is ten times better than the mindless button-mashing of Amalur), so the only two good points of the game are not even there, as far as I'm concerned. Then, as the review said, the grindy, MMO quests really ruined it for me.Them, and the terrible graphics.
  • fullmetallegend - February 7, 2012 7:39 a.m.

    I was wondering if anyone else found this style of combat to be worse. I like Skyrim's combat because it felt a little more real. No matter what weapon or magic I was using, it felt like I was using. KoA feels like any other crazy combo combat game, where the neat looking combos quickly become mashy buttons. And did anyone else feel that the general movement of your character was just... wrong?
  • BladedFalcon - February 7, 2012 11:40 a.m.

    "Skyrim's combat felt more real" Yes, because in reality you totally just swing a sword mindlessly over 10 times to kill a wolf without getting tired, and immediately move to the next foe, and they all just go straight at you without any kind of plan or semblance if intelligence. Totally real. I just laugh at people who say Amalur's combat is button-mashy compared to skyrim. When in Skryrim, let's face it, the combat boils down to pressing one button to attack and pause to just heal whenever the enemy bum rushes you. There are no tactics, no real skill involved. People that judge's amalur combat in the demo are forgetting two very crucial facts: One, you were playing the game in normal difficulty, meaning that it's not as challenging as the game can be. (And let's face it, normal difficulty nowadays might as well be easy mode in most games.) And secondly, you played the very first part of the game, with the easiest, weakest enemies, of course they are not gonna demand much skill from you at first, and you could hack and slash your way trough it because it's simple. But the way combat's designed in Amalur, it seems rather clear to me that the game is eventually going to demand you to block and dodge attacks in order to not die too quickly, and use space effectively, something skyrim never bothered to demand from the player.
  • mothbanquet - February 7, 2012 2:08 p.m.

    I agree, I found Amalur's combat to require as much finesse as Skyrim's. Of course, I was playing as a mage, so by definition I had to block and dodge as much as I could. Still, by the end of the demo I was fresh outta health potions. Can't rely on regenerating health either. In the end, I always liked Fable for its fluid combat and this was in the same vein. Then again, I liked the ES games for their in your face, first-person combat too. I think we have to chalk it up to 'each to his own'.
  • samsneeze - February 7, 2012 3:52 p.m.

    PLEASE! Name one questline in Skyrim that didn't feel like a half-assed mess. I need to go play it now. Out of the one-hundred hours I've poured into the game, I didn't find a single quest that was the least bit exciting or at least made me think about after it was over. Everything I've encountered so far has made me go "Oh, well this is worse than my Daedric Warhammer. Time to move on." There are characters to care about in Skyrim. All of them feel like cardboard. You'd think a series with so much financial backing would put money to having decent writers on board with it. And another thing: "yes, I think Skyrim's combat is ten times better than the mindless button-mashing of Amalur" Are you fucking kidding me? You could not have been serious when you said this. It'd be impossible. I mean, I know there is preference, but the thing you called out was the "Mindless button mashing". It's like you've played neither game to me. Combat is brain dead, plain and simple. I understand the entire game isn't about combat, but enough of it is that it should be better than this. Melee is just hitting the attack button, and yes you can say that about any game, but man, is it true in Skyrim. You might backpedal, or strafe while you swing, but if the enemy is stronger than you there isn't enough skill involved for you to actually feel like you're doing something. You know, Fable: The Lost Chapters is technically a better game than Skyrim, it just doesn't look as pretty or have as much to do. It does have better characters, more memorable people, quests that are fun and rewarding, and when you save the world, people mention it for more than two or three days. Granted, there are no guilds to join and the map is considerably smaller, but at least you have actual boss fights. So fuck this noise, I'm off to fight Jack of Blades and marry Lady Gray
  • inkyspot - February 7, 2012 5:39 a.m.

    Man I can't wait for this game to come. I hope it comes either before I head to the gym or afterwards. I can't afford delivery to mess with my workout... or maybe I can make it a 4 day workout week instead of the usual 5. My next game will be ME3... although ssx is really tempting me to get it on the first day.
  • Baron164 - February 7, 2012 6:04 a.m.

    I'm planning on picking this up eventually. I really enjoyed the demo. I didn't mind the graphics, looked more like it was going for that MMO graphic style. All though it doesn't bother me when things don't look photo realistic.
  • FOZ - February 7, 2012 7:37 a.m.

    I only played the demo on PC, and I really don't get get the "dated graphics" criticism. And did people only play the intro sequence or what? When I looked at the movelist and leveled up once or twice the combat looked pretty promising. Seriously, you're going to judge an RPG's combat by the first 2 hours of the game? Also, the demo was developed by a third party. People have said they played the full game for 40 hours without a single crash or game-breaking bug, which sure as hell is more than you can say for Skyrim.
  • Darkhawk - February 7, 2012 8:26 a.m.

    My primary objection is the art style. It's like they took the most generic designs possible, ran them through a cartoony WoW filter, and then highlighted the gaudiest of colours. Compare to the dark beauty of Demon's Souls, and this just looks silly.
  • ThatGuyFromTV - February 7, 2012 8:53 a.m.

    See, that's why I'm having so much trouble trying to convince myself to try this. It's graphics look like a crap job compared to almost every other game. Hell, the Super Mario Galaxies have better graphics on this. When your game has graphics that could be beaten by Wii graphics (even if they are the best Wii graphics to date), you need to put a bit more time into it.
  • ObliqueZombie - February 7, 2012 8:55 a.m.

    Not a bad review, Mr. Hollander. Fair, but highlights what the game does best. I'll be having my eye on this, so long as I don't get caught up in SWTOR, The Darkness II, and eventually, Mass Effect 3. I'm also currently beating my controller into frustrated submission over Soul Calibur, so there's that, too.
  • comaqi - February 7, 2012 9:25 a.m.

    I don't know how finished the game was when the put the demo out but it played terribly and looked awful. I had high hopes for this to. Kind of disappointed.
  • joshua-cubilete - February 7, 2012 2:58 p.m.

    /The demo was a 3 month old code. I have the actual finished game and it is way better.
  • Fuzunga - February 7, 2012 10:01 a.m.

    I am genially offended by your comments about the visuals. Are you kidding? Imagine for a moment that this was a Wii game. Would you say the graphics look dated? No, because Nintendo always makes up for it with artistic style. This game ought to be praised for it's fantastic style and vibrant color pallet, not criticized because the visuals look "dated". But the simple fact that it's on HD consoles means it has to look as good as Battlefield 3. The constant comparisons to WoW and Fable make me want to punch people.
  • GR HollanderCooper - February 7, 2012 10:03 a.m.

    It's the art style that looks like WoW, not the graphics.
  • ThePrivateer - February 7, 2012 10:28 a.m.

    No, you specifically cited "Graphics look dated" as a con.
  • GR HollanderCooper - February 7, 2012 10:40 a.m.

    Because they do. That's a separate complaint. The graphics look dated, and the art style looks like WoWs.
  • joshua-cubilete - February 7, 2012 2:57 p.m.

    I actually love the fantasy style graphics and they don't look dated to me at all. The art style is way better than WOWs so there is no way you should compare the two.
  • ScrEAMaPiLLar - February 8, 2012 8:47 a.m.

    What coop is trying to say by "dated graphics" is the game is using a lot lower resolution textures and polygons. The style could look better with more color and an up res.
  • Fuzunga - February 7, 2012 10:04 a.m.

    * Genuinely goddammit!
  • PleaseSitDownICannotSee - February 7, 2012 11:02 a.m.

    Typo or not, how are Coop's comments "offending" you? Honestly, video game website comments are almost as hyperbolic as youtube's.

Showing 21-40 of 62 comments

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

More Info

Available Platforms: Xbox 360, PC, PS3
Genre: Role Playing