Rather nice review scores go live for KoA: Reckoning

Tuesday, 7th February 2012 13:52 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Reviews for 38 Studio’s first foray into the market, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, have gone live and below the break are many a link to click full of opinions on the RPG.

The majority of scores are around the 8 mark, but there are a couple of perfect scores in there, as well as a couple not-so-perfect scores.

IGN and OXM went live with scores over the weekend, providing the game a 9 and 8, respectively.

The game is out today in the US for PC, PS3, and Xbox 360. Below the scores is a new, 30-second video for the game.



  1. Gheritt White

    New IP does well in ultra-competitive genre shocker!

    #1 3 years ago
  2. Gadzooks!

    I was already sold on it from the demo, but its good to see positive reviews.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Telepathic.Geometry

    Wow, G4 really hammered it. I got an e-mail telling me that this will arrive at my place on Friday, and it’s a long-weekend this week. :D Yay!!!

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Edo

    Solid 8 overall.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. ManuOtaku

    #3 i envy you in a good way,i have to wait almost a month, enjoy and please later tell your thoughts about it ok

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Telepathic.Geometry

    How come you have to wait manu?

    #6 3 years ago
  7. The_Red

    Aside from G4′s crazy score, it’s good all around. Hopefully it lives up to the its potential.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Moonwalker1982

    I tried to like it, but the demo which IMO gives a good impression of the game didn’t do anything for me. It felt like a MMO to me, the world didn’t feel alive, i didn’t like the quest structure, i didn’t dig the environments much, it just didn’t engage me. As i pressed on i felt becoming more and more bored.

    And even the combat…became a chore after a while for me.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. LOLshock94

    GamesTM gives it an 8 so it must be good best magazine everrrrrr

    #9 3 years ago
  10. Sadismek

    G4 gave it a 2.5? Wow. I think the game is nice, but I didn’t like Fable too much, so… yeah :)

    #10 3 years ago
  11. fearmonkey

    The game has reviewed about what I expected, I’m looking forward to playing it when I have some time. I have too many other games to finish yet before I buy another. The game looks like alot of fun, I hope it sells well enough that it gets a sequel and improves.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. TheWulf

    It’s not really hard to appease the critics listed thus far, is it? They’re not known for their low scores when it comes to mainstream games. In fact, what they have been known for is pulling reviews or firing reviewers when games are considered to be scored too low.

    So there’s nothing I can trust there, yet. I’ll be very interested to see what RPG Fan thinks of it, though. Their reviews are usually a bit more in depth than “Gawwwd this game feels like seeex to plaaay!” which is pretty much sadly what the more renowned review sites are like these days.

    I’d like to see just one site pick them up on how amazingly generic their setting is, and how similar to Dragon Age it the aesthetic feels, and how the innovative gameplay is essentially Fable. Because otherwise we’ll have a full round of critics praising the same old boring tat that doesn’t reinvent anything, and does the same old that we’ve always seen.

    And I will stare at them scornfully for giving this higher scores than the likes of Sacred, which did exactly the same thing, except that Sacred was more indie and European. But that’s usually how things are.

    (Er, Sacred, not Sacrifice sorry. I always get those two game names mixed up.)

    #12 3 years ago
  13. TheWulf


    Exactly. That’s what I was saying about it all along – it just feels like an MMO. I’ve seen many MMOs that share exactly that aesthetic style. It looks a lot like Perfect World, for example. it’s just off putting because there’s just a deadness to the world, it doesn’t really feel alive.

    Worse is that due to how they fetishise side-quests, there seems to be a lack of overall purpose to the game, and thus a lack of story. So you don’t actually feel as though you really have anything that you actually want to achieve. “Eh, I suppose I’ll do this odd job for you…”

    The combat is nice in a Fable sort of way, but the problem there is that the game is entirely focused around the combat. That’s the problem. Now, you can have a game focused around frenetic combat but you need to pick up the slack by making it charismatic and compelling. Look at the likes of Bastion or Magicka to see how you do this properly.

    In a game like this, you need the world to feel alive with character and identity, and you need a sense of purpose. That’s what made Bastion work, if you think about it. In Bastion, the world itself was its own character thta you were wandering through and learning about. But if the world is Generic Fantasy World #2,972,020 from the Book of Generic Fantasy Worlds then you have no compulsion to learn. And you know exactly what you’re going to find if you explore, because it’s predictable.

    That’s another thing that made Bastion work and Amalur not working. Bastion was genuinely surprising, but Bastion didn’t outstay its welcome. It was just the right length. See, Bastion had a set number of peculiar things for you to discover and be baffled/amused by. And then once you’d discovered them as part of the overarching narrative, the game ends. It all wraps up beautifully.

    Bastion is a complete experience, from the moment the kid wakes up to whichever of the two endings you get.

    However, with a game like Amalur – you step into the world, and it’s like an MMO. You pick up a few quests, you do some generic combat in a world that you can’t bring yourself to care about, then you rinse and repeat until all the content is used up. And I have better things to do with my time than that. What bothers me about Amalur is that if it’s too praised then it’s going to stunt the expectations that people have of RPGs.

    Or worse… so much worse… some developers may actually try to clone it.

    The thing is is that both I and a number of my favourite outlets had complaints like this to level at Sacred. Sacred was almost exactly the same as Reckoning in any way. Sacred was an action RPG with frenetic combat set in a fairly generic world. BUT, at least Sacred had a sense of humour, which elevated it above Amalur in a lot of ways.

    Amalur is just the most generic side of Sacred solidified into a game, and without the humour. So it’s sans humour, sans character, and sans purpose. And all you can do is pick up ‘side quests’ and grind through lots of repetitive combat. I don’t care how fun the combat is, but that’s going to get boring, and that sounds a lot like an MMORPG to me.

    The result is that you have an entirely average action RPG that’s basically a single-player MMO. What irks me though is that the developers have been yelling at us about how it’s the greatest thing ever, and how they’ve invented their own genres, and how the approach of every other RPG is bad because it doesn’t work in the way that Amalur does. And gods these guys are egotistical jerkwads.

    I really think they need to play Bastion to see how a REAL action RPG is put together, an action RPG that does everything right.

    Another bonus that Bastion has over Amalur is that Bastion’s name isn’t the result of key-smashing. Thus Bastion’s name doesn’t make my spellchecker furious at me. I really dislike how, again, in Amalur everything (EVERYTHING!) is named by key-smashing. I’ve played it – I’ve seen the names of the people, the towns, the races, and so on. It’s ALL key-smashing!

    #13 3 years ago
  14. fearmonkey

    @12 – yeah but the average user score on metacritic is 8.8, so not only the critics like the game.
    The game feels nothing at all like Dragon Age, at all, I’m not sure where the reference comes from, other than DA2 had an action feel to combat (which I disliked compared to DA:Origins). DA has a much more serious tone than Kingdoms.
    I played the heck out of Sacred and Sacred 2, and the demo for Kingdoms feels nothing like those either. I admit, I got bored with Sacred 2 and didnt finish, but I spent over 60 hours before quiting, hopefully Kingdoms isnt the same way.

    oh and your right it does feel a lot like an MMO, for good or worse. Its cool you dont like the game, i just dont understand your rants against it.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. Edo

    LOL GameSpot review THE BAD:
    Generic story and characters,generic world,generic quests.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. DSB

    “A great action game in an empty, forgettable world” – Ars Technica

    That pretty much confirms my fears.

    I really wouldn’t want to spend very long time in a world that isn’t worth spending time in.

    Setting matters a lot over time. It also makes me fear that some of those scores are perhaps based off 5-6 hours in a 20-30 hour game.

    If you looked at something like Assassins Creed 2 for the first six hours, it might seem like a great game. After another 14 hours of reruns, you’re sick of it. Filler should really count for someting, and negatively so.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. Anders

    Giant Bomb gave it 4/5:

    #17 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.