Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning review

  • PvE and PvP in harmony
  • Not a WoW clone
  • Quite user-friendly
  • Not an MMO revolution
  • Still grindy
  • Tons of hand-holding

Most of the game’s loot is purchased via Renown, which reduces the obsessive drop-hunting of other games but does homogenise everything somewhat, as so many folk of the same Career and level as you will be picking up exactly the same kit. It’s hard to feel like an individual in WAR – at first, at least. There is definite scope for difference in both your abilities and your appearance, but generally it’s quite a templated game. That’s not necessarily a failing – you are, after all, a foot soldier in a vast war, not the hero come to save the world. Another reflection of that is the class design. While they do all ultimately fall into the comfortable boxes of tank, DPS, ranged and healer, they really aren’t the same old stereotypes. In how they look and how they play, each and every one feels versatile, powerful and an agreeably long way outside of the ancient D&D blueprint.


Similarly, despite their geographic separation, the PvP and the PvE are very much thematically intertwined – you’re always fighting against the opposing faction, whether it’s an NPC, a player or a mixed army of both. Maybe it reduces the variety a little, but it definitely strengthens the sense of purpose, and when you do take those first steps into RvR they feel natural and in keeping with the monster-bashing. Aside from that calamitous beta launch and the occasional minor bug, what WAR also is, or at least seems likely to be from where we’re standing, is the most polished, complete MMO launch in history. With proper PvP and PvE there from the off, a vast choice of classes and a hatful of new ideas, it makes the likes of LotRO and Conan seem like footnotes, and even WoW’s initial launch seems pedestrian by comparison.

Its similarities to and improvements on WoW – most especially in PvP – make it the natural next home for anyone either dispossessed by Blizzard’s effort or who has held out from all MMOs in the hope of something a bit meatier. Playing Warhammer Online, it’s easy to forget that this game stems from a hobby so often accused of nerdiness. It shares design values, fiction and certain concepts with the Warhammer tabletop game, but really it’s only the name that binds them. Conan was supposed to be the so-macho MMO, but against this it seems a bit Sealed Knot. WAR is war. The associated intensity of this means it probably won’t pick up anything like the audience WoW has, but it will get a large one. And a very, very satisfied one at that.

Sep 18, 2008

More Info

Release date: Sep 18 2008 - PC (US)
Available Platforms: PC
Genre: Role Playing
Published by: EA Mythic
Developed by: Mythic Entertainment
Franchise: Warhammer
ESRB Rating:
Teen: Suggestive Themes, Use of Alcohol, Use of Tobacco, Violence, Mild Blood
PEGI Rating:
Rating Pending


  • onewheeled999 - June 6, 2010 2:03 a.m.

    Can anybody explain to me what's going on in the last picture on page 3?
  • kstichler - September 26, 2009 9:54 p.m.

    I spent 2 months in the world of Warhammer Online. GamesRadar rated it a 9. They said: You'll love PvE and PvP in harmony Not a WoW clone Quite user-friendly You'll hate Not an MMO revolution Still grindy Tons of hand-holding They were right when they said you'd hate the grind. It is way grindy. Grindy, grindy, grindy. I thought I was playing 'WarRunner Online'. I spent about 80% of my game time running up and down paths looking for the quest requirements. I made it to 9th lvl before I got so bored and frustrated that I was ready to give up on the game. I was having zero fun playing the game as a single-player. Mythic makes the claim that the Public Quests are one of the things they did right with Warhammer: Age of Reckoning. The PQ is a good innovation for MMOs but, it isn't worth anything if the areas are so lowly populated. I played about 7 weeks before I was able to get into a PQ with a party worthy of mentioning. That 1 good party had about 8 other players, and I had a real good time playing it. Every other time I was in a PQ for the first 7 weeks, there was maybe 1 other player besides me. Well, sometimes 2, my friend who got me to try WAR was there too a couple of times. His avatar was maxxed out at level 40, and he was slumming to help me out. I don't really count him because he shouldn't have been there. So the PQ areas were pretty dead, but what one thing related to parties and quests that WAR does right is the Open Grouping. You can jump in and out of parties very easily. None of the hours spent searching for a party that needs another tank. All of that waiting was what killed Guild Wars for me. And speaking of Guild Wars, I think the loot in WAR is about equal to the stuff you'll find in GW. Actually, WAR is a little better. The loot in GW was mediocre at best, and many items came with negative modifiers. I'm not sure why GW did that. I think it must have been to keep PvP level. But hindering the RPG part of the game was a bad idea. If the uniques are too unbalanced for PvP, then don't allow them in PvP. Don't give them negatives and spoil it for everybody. So why didn't I quit playing when I hated it at level 9? Well, my friend, who has been in the game since it started, told me to quit playing the RPG stuff and move over to the PvP part of the game. And that was were I spent the rest of my time. The scenarios I played were fun. The PvP combat on the party level is fun too. It is so much more fun than the RPG part of the game that if I was to run a new character I would skip the RPG part and go straight to PvP. Now, what is the verdict? As a PvP fighting game it's fun. You have a persistent character and you gain advancement based on your performance in the scenario. As an RPG it sucks. But if the PvP aspects of the game appeal to you, then play it and you'll like it. Just be aware that you can have the same online PvP fun in Battlefield Heroes, with no monthly subscription fee. Overall, I can't be as generous as GamesRadar, I can only give it a 6.5 at best.
  • krunkattack - September 29, 2008 10:39 p.m.

    I had a WoW subscription up until a month ago... played that for 2 years. Too busy right now, but in a few months I'm gonna decide between WoTLK and Warhammer. Warhammer looks really interesting, but so does WoTLK. Articles like this really make me want to see how the WoW VS War discussion goes in 2-3 months.
  • Feenyx - September 25, 2008 1:55 p.m.

    Couple things... 1) @ clifford and other flamers: seriously? The graphics do not 'suck'. If anything, they are more realistic than WoW because the colors are more muted, the trees and plants are made up of more than 10 polygons, and the spell effects are actually different and not just the same 5 things with different colors. 2) @ people that apparently didn't read carefully: they admit that this is a review of only about the first couple weeks of content. For those of you that plan on playing to higher than level 15 or so, you have to take what they're saying with a grain of salt. Open-world RvR, WAR's main focus, isn't really 'activated' in the lower levels. Keeps/castles, more practical use of siege weapons, big dungeons (instanced and otherwise), and capital city battles have yet to be seen. 3) @ mansemat and other Warhammer fans: Thanks for bringing that up. Ppl new to the IP often dont realize that certain things in the MMO are in there because they almost HAVE to be in there from a lore perspective. Weird dye names, certain armor style choices, siege weapons, etc. are all straight from the 25-year-old backstory. Tabletop fans (myself included) are generally pleased with Mythic's handling of the IP, and the 'bringing to life' all the previously static characters we have come to appreciate. And to all the rest of you that stumble upon my opinions... chill. Give the game a try. It's a whole 50 bucks (US, anyway) which includes the first month of play. So even if you stop after the first month, it wasn't any more expensive than a PS3 or XBox game, with lots of replayability and more content. You're also trying it out when other people are starting it too, so there will be lots of folks in the starter areas. If you think it's catchy, renew your subscription. If not, shelve it for now and by a pre-paid game card later.
  • Omahunek - September 25, 2008 6:18 a.m.

    Well, if you really look at the WAR Prelude (Especially if you read the graphic novel that comes with the Collector's Edition), you'll find that while Order is really an 'alliance' per se, Destruction is not. Chaos are raiding empire because they feel like it, Dark Elves are taking advantage of it and using the Greenskins to tie up the dwarves, and obviously, the Greenskins just kill whoever is closest. While Order wouldn't immediately kill each other if the forces of Destruction were destroyed, the opposite is probably true. However, A hurricane hit Houston (,Texas) about a week ago, so I got to play for about a day inbetween my lack of internet connection, and the Grace Period ending (The gamestop I preordered at still doesn't have Power, wtf.) From Beta Experience, and the one day I played For realz, It's awesome, and it's the best damn PvP I've ever seen.
  • discoSte - September 24, 2008 12:26 p.m.

    I came from AoC which I enjoyed a lot, not expecting much from War. The game blew me away and showed how a morg should and can work. Leveling and itemization just bacame a bi-product of having fun. With so much to so and so much variety I just saw the levels slip by. War is what AoC should have been! Even wow could learn a few things from this little jem!
  • Luke0808 - September 23, 2008 9:34 p.m.

    Anyone who won't play this game because it has poor graphics obviously haven't played enough games to realise that the graphics don't make the game. Yes the graphics on Age Of Conan are awesome....but the game SUCKS. The game is so unstable and full of bugs it's absurd that it got released when it did, it had great potential but ended up a big failure. Warhammer on the other hand, admitably not the best graphics in the world (although I mainly find its the characters that are poor, when you start playing you'll find some of the landscapes are actually quite cool). Anyway, in comparison to AoC, WAR is a MUCH better more complete game. I think the majority of people who have given it a fair chance are loving it. Without a doubt it's the best mmo out there at the moment. It's not going to be a WoW killer, WoW has over 10 million players and they aren't going to all of a sudden up and leave...alot of people will probably join WAR...But generally I think the games are too similar for WAR to reign over WoW. However, WoW won't be at the top forever...and I look forward to playing the game that doesn't 'kill' WoW...but takes its place as the number 1 MMO.
  • ALF - September 19, 2008 6:48 p.m.

    Yea, I agree with shockolate, Looks good but, I don't like MMOs. Guess I'll just stick with Rock Band 2!! (Best Game Eva)
  • azazelx - October 15, 2008 12:12 p.m.

    This game is the best mmo and probably will be for years to come. Ive played Final fantasy 11 for years and sadly almost every job at 75 which is max.. i easily left that game for this. Just wait til the Von Carlstein expansion
  • Esquire - September 27, 2008 5:33 p.m.

    Regarding the similarities with the original Warhammer games, there seems to be a misconception that WAR is solely based on the Warhammer tabletop games because this is what people associate with Games Workshop's high street stores. In fact, much of the game lore was delveloped from Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, the traditional Dungeons & Dragons style rpg which was contained in a great big book about 4cm thick. It was played in the minds of the gamers with only pre-printed character sheets and multi-sided dice as props. In Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, there were an array of skills and careers. For example, you could play the part of a grave robber with skills like climbing walls, jumping and hiding that provided a percentage advantage in carrying out these feats. Some of these careers were distinctly unheroic, like the political agitators and mule skinners, roles that are only for the NPCs in WAR, and yet it was possible to flesh out such characters and make fantastic adventure stories based on them. There was however a need for a person with the ability to implement the rules and know the game lore who wasn't usually an active player. Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay had a horror theme that seemed to owe something to the stories of H.P. Lovecraft and was distinctly European in flavour, presenting the game world as a sort of alternative seventeenth century Europe, quite different to Dungeons & Dragons. While WAR holds true to much of the game lore of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and Warhammer the tabletop game, for those who remember the original Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay game, the modern phenomenon of MMO games fails to capture the imagination in the same way and the fact that everyone is trying to exploit the game mechanics makes it seem an incredibly rushed experience where even on the pure roleplaying servers, there is little evidence of actual role playing going on where people only say things 'in character'.
  • Akiira - September 25, 2008 4:07 a.m.

    @mansemat good point and as a huge warhammer fan that was really important to me as well but after playing the game and reading the quest the only major thing that bothers me is the destruction working together the way they do. orks would never ally themselves on this scale to anyone and dark elves dont really ally so much as use other factions. but beside that it was all really cannon. i think the main reason for this is because games workshop worked so closely with mythic in the making of the game, a fact i am very happy about.
  • Mansemat - September 25, 2008 2:38 a.m.

    Great review but so far nobody has touched base on how accurate the game is in relation to actual Warhammer Fantasy.
  • Akiira - September 23, 2008 4 a.m.

    clifordxxx is clearly just a retard that managed to get ahold of a computer somewhere, and thus his comments shouldnt be taken to heart
  • johnnype - September 22, 2008 8:12 p.m.

    I don't know why so many people are looking for a WoW killer. Can't a game exist and be successful on it's own? It's not an either/or question. I like WoW but I also like LotRO and I like WAR. If I get tired of one I play the other. Right now I'm enjoying the hell out of WAR but I'm sure I'll play WoW and/or LotRO again sometime next year.
  • juXawin - September 22, 2008 6:53 p.m.

    better than wow and aoc imo. give it a try.
  • Juriasu - September 21, 2008 7:14 p.m.

    I don't think any game could bring down WoW, no matter how good that game would be.
  • cliffordxxx - September 21, 2008 3:01 p.m.

    Also the game feels very linear, for example: ITs like they start you off in a small circle, you complete the quests in that circle then move on to the next circle, and so on. Not like the Very open world MMO's I enjoyed like Everquest and WOW.
  • cliffordxxx - September 21, 2008 2:52 p.m.

    Bought Warhammer, it was an EPIC FAIL!!! graphics are so horrible i couldnt even play. Going back to Age of Conan. AOC has the best graphics out there. would recommend Warhammer for people with old crappy computers that can't play Conan or to children 5-15year range.
  • Akiira - September 21, 2008 3:50 a.m.

    best mmo out there right now, and will be for a while
  • EmoMuffin - September 20, 2008 4:24 a.m.

    For a game you gave a "9" rating, you sure didn't seem to like it. I think I'll stick with LOTRO.

Showing 1-20 of 24 comments

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