Why wasn't Kingdom of Amalur as praised as Skyrim or Dragon Age?

[Goofguy]

I didn't find it to be a particularly immersive game. The minimal facial animations made character interactions so wooden and the lack of a jump function made the world feel so limiting. I didn't feel invested in the story or the universe, I felt like all I was doing was running from quest-giver to generic looking cave, mine or ruins with some fights along the way.

I too started playing this game this month due to it being free on PSN+. I sunk about 40 hours and quit shortly after getting to Mel Senshir. I just had 0 interest in exploring the eastern lands. I might come back to the game piece meal but I just do not care much to see it through any time soon.

 

[lapan]

Just a quick combat moveset for only one weapon in dark souls,
light attack, heavy attack, roll then light attack, backstep then light attack, kick, forward + heavy attack, combos with light light light attack etc, downward thrust attack, two handed doubles all previous stuff.

Multiply this moveset by the extensive amount of different types of weapons and shield combinations.
Multiply this again by the vast amount of pyromancy, magic, and faith spells,

Dark Souls combat has depth and nuance. Plus it is really only the early game where you can face enemies one at a time and backstab your way through it. Even thinking about the level design, the game constantly throws multiple enemies with different types of attacks at you, from throwing multiple melee guys at you while having fire pyromancers/ magic casters/ archers firing at you.

Dude, the only the difference between the weapons are the power attack and the special attack (up + R2 I think). The weapons in KoA are way different compared to Dark Souls.

You can pull enemies to you one-by-one the whole fucking game.

Maybe if you only count weapons of the same class. It's however entirely different if you use a sword, an halberd, a dagger, a bow/crossbow or even a shield. That's not even counting magic and magic's interactions with weapons

 

[Laser Priest]

Dark Souls is all about the combat, and KoA beats Dark Souls at what Dark Souls is supposed to be all about, KoA is even a harder game to boot. That's why I brought up Dark Souls.

You're straight trolling now.

Now?!

I don't like accusing people of trolling, but this guy's been blatantly ignoring any opposition or telling them that their opinion is wrong for the entire thread. It's clear he made this thread to try to get a badge or simply annoy people because it's pretty obvious he doesn't actually care what anyone who didn't like KoA thinks.

 

[chinangel]

I'm uncertain, considering I absolutely loved it. I would've loved to see more to the game, considering it had beautiful backdrops, very fun combat and great character creation.

Though not perfect, I'd love to see mroe.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I'm curios, how would you define depth?

There has to be complexity to the gameplay and game mechanics. There are many enemies in Dark Souls but pretty much all of them require the same strategy to defeat, all you do is block and then attack afterward (for any character build). Or you can slowly strafe around and backstab them because the enemy AI is so bad (you can't even do that in KoA). Or you can cheese them all with a bow and arrow because the AI doesn't know how to fight back against ranged combat. A game that has depth will throw enemies at you that force you into using different moves and different strategies, Dark Souls does not, even a game like Heavenly Sword does that (so... yeah, Ninja Theory makes better combat systems than From Software). The combat system is very simplistic, there's only one special move you have and most of them are rather useless. There's no combos of any type; hell, the game at least should force you to properly time your attacks with the weapon animations to maximize damage. Even character builds are very simplistic. There's only 4 stats that you want to invest in as you want Vitality, Endurance, Str or Dex (for weapon scaling), and Faith or Int (for the kind of magic you want). Even then you can eliminate Str/Dex by putting an element on your weapon and Faith/Int if you use fire magic instead so you are just down to leveling 2 stats to increase health and stamina, where's the depth? KoA and Borderlands have more complex builds than Dark Souls. Dark Souls even has a completely useless stat: Resistance. That's how poorly the game's systems were thought out.

The camera was locked to such an obviously horrible angle and it drove me crazy. How little control you had over what you wanted to look at was maddening. And it made me twice as annoyed knowing that someone actually thought that was a good idea.

I also felt the combat was clumsy and even early on it looked like there were key attacks/spells/etc that would end up being the crutch you leaned on and favored over everything else. It seemed odd that it looked like you were supposed to combo or chain stuff together, but the means to do so felt so very clumsy.

The camera is fully adjustable...

I'm playing a rogue and all the moves and abilities play off each other and allow you to chain stuff together. Use Shadow Flare (don't even do the 2nd attack of throwing knives), it staggers the enemy, roll in and dagger attack to knock the enemy in the air, and then shoot him full of arrows as he's in the air.

Dude, the only the difference between the weapons are the power attack and the special attack (up + R2 I think). The weapons in KoA are way different compared to Dark Souls.

You can pull enemies to you one-by-one the whole fucking game.

Maybe if you only count weapons of the same class. It's however entirely different if you use a sword, an halberd, a dagger, a bow/crossbow or even a shield. That's not even counting magic and magic's interactions with weapons

So... just like every other game, even KoA. How is Dark Souls better, different, or special?

You're straight trolling now.

Now?!

I don't like accusing people of trolling, but this guy's been blatantly ignoring any opposition or telling them that their opinion is wrong for the entire thread. It's clear he made this thread to try to get a badge or simply annoy people because it's pretty obvious he doesn't actually care what anyone who didn't like KoA thinks.

I understand why people prefer Skyrim (or other game) when they make a post like this:

Spoiler: Battenberg post

First off apologies for the misquote, genuine mistake due to not reading your post carefully enough.

Secondly if you haven't even played Skyrim then how on earth do you expect people to take your opinion on this seriously. Actually yes if you change the difficulty the game does become more challenging, dragons in particular become terrifyingly powerful on max difficulty and, as you can guess, there are a lot of dragons in the game. I wasn't basing my argument on having _watched_ someone play KoA for a mere couple of hours, I actually played it. If you haven't played these games you're comparing KoA to then how do you know these 'generic' criticisms still apply to them? For example the difficulty thing
- KoA is absolutely the easiest RPG I've played, this is not a criticism I would make of Dark Souls/ Demon's souls (and I would consider Skyrim to be of above average difficulty for its top tiers which is where players wanting a challenge would go - KoA's top tier just doesn't have the same level of toughness)
- The Rogue class in KoA is a massive letdown - you're decribing the stealth is Skyrim as "subpar" and "not up to a stealth game" however I have played a lot of stealth games with worse stealth systems and if Skyrim's stealth system is subpar what does that make KoA's?
- The warrior class makes the game play more like a hack n slash than an rpg (although this is partly true of all the classes). While the melee combat in Skyrim is raw and clunky it still has a unique feel to it and in fact certain weapons/ combinations are great fun, for example the perks on the blocking tree allow you to slow down time when a heavy attack is incoming or make your shield bash powerful enough to make a dragon stagger or even turn it into a battering ram to run through your opponents like skittles. Hack n slash is fine in an rpg as long as there's something more to it that makes it interesting and exciting.
- There is not enough freedom in KoA
- Skyrim has a far bigger map and a hell of a lot more missions to do, the environment Bethesda spent a decade creating gave them so much leighway to let the player essentially _choose_ their own experience. I certainly did not feel this with KoA's somewhat linear main story and the huge abundance of fetch quests/ kill monster X quests.
- There are, as I recall, only 4 races in KoA each giving a different selection of skills a small boost. Skyrim has 10 and, due to the large number of skill trees there is basically a race for every class (not just warrior, mage, rogue) PLUS each race has a more individual look PLUS each race has their own special ability, unique to them, PLUS each race gets bonus resistances/ bonuses outside of the skill trees.
- Finally there's the skill trees and classes themselves. In KoA there's rogue, mage, and warrior and you can, to a certain extent, combine these 3 giving a whoppin potential of seven class makeups for a character. There are 18 skill trees in Skyrim and these skill trees go beyond simpy creating a character for battling with, they give you skills that are useful when talking to strangers or that bring the price down on that shiny weapon the local merchant has or, for a less lawful character, simpy steal the extra gold you need. These skills just aren't there in KoA, your character only really develops as a fighter. Of course that isn't to say these skills aren't useful in combat, I can think of combat based uses for 16, maybe 17 of those 18 skills, because several of them are multi purpose and this just gives the player so much free roam to make exactly the character they want. You want a typical RPG mage? Sure, go for the destruction tree. You'd rather have the ability to conjure a hoarde of allies to fight for you? Great there's an option for that too. You'd rather have the power to simply alter enemies minds/ deceive them? Well there's a tree for that too and of course it goes without saying that there's nothing stopping you from combining these skills to your preference because each of these skills will improve as you use them. If you want to make them even better then you can spend perks in them as you level up to get new powers.

Frankly Skyrim is, in my opinion, as close to a pure dungeons and dragons based video game as I have ever played and that is what makes it a great RPG in my opinion. Others may disagree that point but, on average, the odds are stacked against people finding KoA a better game than Skyrim, you are just in a minority on that one.

Regardless of the misquote earlier my point still stands - you are overemphasising the pros of this game and understating its flaws (flaws that apply specifically to this game, not to all RPGs) to convince everyone it's the bees knees. If your experience of this game better than the average experience of others (KoA (PC) got an average of just 63 from over 800 players on metacritic) then that's good for you but I don't know why you are so desperate to make everyone else feel the same outside of some validation of your own SUBJECTIVE opinion. My experience of Skyrim was above the average player's and I rate it as one of the most enjoyable games I have ever played however I don't fly into a rage when people don't hail it as the best game ever because I also see its flaws, something you are totally failing to do here. As such unless your next reply comes with a healthy dose of perspective I think I'll leave this argument here as I could do something more productive with my time like bang my head against a brick wall.

But a majority of the posts are like this:

The minimal facial animations made character interactions so wooden

You mean just like every other RPG besides Bioware RPGs.

No, "many RPGs" do not have the exact enemy level issues...

The flaws of KoA aren't leveled more at KoA than other games. They aren't IN other games.

Borderlands and almost every RPG has scaling issues, the flaws ARE IN basically every RPG.

Then, there's a bunch of posts citing KoA is too easy when it's harder than Skyrim and Dark Souls. There's also a bunch of posts saying KoA becomes a grind when you do every quest. What RPG doesn't become a grind if you do every quest? Hell, what open world game (like say GTA) doesn't feel like a grind if you do everything?

 

[Drizzitdude]

Really the thing that made me stop playing was how I never really felt like I was learning anything new or had to change up my strategy in combat besides destroy things with a greatword. The combos were pretty shallow for a game focused on action combat, I just finally got to the point where I realized every encounter was just going to be the same and got bored of it. Was it a good game? Sure, it was fun while it lasted, the loot was fun and the quests were pretty well done but I just couldn't bring myself to go through a whole bunch of the same battles over and over to reach the end. I liked the game, but I could never compare it to a gem like dragons dogma without laughing my ass off. I am not saying its crap by any means, and R.A. Salvatore is my favorite author of all time, I'm just saying it could have been better.

 

[Bombiz]

No, "many RPGs" do not have the exact enemy level issues...

The flaws of KoA aren't leveled more at KoA than other games. They aren't IN other games.

Borderlands and almost every RPG has scaling issues, the flaws ARE IN basically every RPG.

Then, there's a bunch of posts citing KoA is too easy when it's harder than Skyrim and Dark Souls. There's also a bunch of posts saying KoA becomes a grind when you do every quest. What RPG doesn't become a grind if you do every quest? Hell, what open world game (like say GTA) doesn't feel like a grind if you do everything?

just because you think it's harder then Skyrim or Dark Souls doesn't excuse the fact that it's still an easy game even when put on hard. it even has a "KILL EVERYTHING ON SCREEN" button.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

just because you think it's harder then Skyrim or Dark Souls doesn't excuse the fact that it's still an easy game even when put on hard. it even has a "KILL EVERYTHING ON SCREEN" button.

So what's the excuse for Skyrim and Dark Souls? That is my whole point. KoA gets knocked for X when X exists (and usually worse) in another RPG that gets praised. I'm not saying KoA is better, just merely it's the same in many regards to other games. Skyrim and Dark Souls get GOTY nominations while KoA doesn't, it seems like a complete double standard to me. I'm not asking to raise KoA up, I'm asking to knock all the other games (with the same flaws) down.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

just because you think it's harder then Skyrim or Dark Souls doesn't excuse the fact that it's still an easy game even when put on hard. it even has a "KILL EVERYTHING ON SCREEN" button.

So what's the excuse for Skyrim and Dark Souls? That is my whole point. KoA gets knocked for X when X exists (and usually worse) in another RPG that gets praised. I'm not saying KoA is better, just merely it's the same in many regards to other games. Skyrim and Dark Souls get GOTY nominations while KoA doesn't, it seems like a complete double standard to me. I'm not asking to raise KoA up, I'm asking to knock all the other games (with the same flaws) down.

But as others have said (multiple times) the other games have features that either play-down those flaws or negate them completely.

For example: Dragon Age has a generic story, negated by the amazing character interaction and the story being well polished for what it is.

KOA on the other-hand doesn't have anything stand-out about it, at best it's average at everything.

 

[Riot3000]

I enjoyed KoA it was pretty fun yet flawed. It was not a turd as everyone would make it to be these were my issues/

1. It was too big at times way to many fetch quest most likely from its MMO development
2. Lore overload It threw way to much at you at once with terms and names when it is the first game its better to ease that stuff in.
3. Empty it goes with the big world In the first part of the game with the forest area it did not feel so bad but once it gets to desert there is just too much space in my opinion,
4. Execution in general from the story to characters and dialogue felt like they were just there for the sake of it.
5. Focus I think the devs were too ambitious and try to do so much that a linear focus might of done them better.

Overall its one of those games where I felt bad for what happened to the studio personally because the game just needed some polish that could of been adressed in a sequel now I can only wonder.

Side thing when it comes to best RPG Combat for me it goes to Dragons Dogma I enjoyed KoA combat and trying out the builds but Dogma hit that sweet spot for me IMO.

 

[Zeldias]

I thought it was alright, but the fact is that it was piss-easy, crazy exploitable (to make it even easier than it already is), and it wasn't exactly great looking. In addition, most of the quests were pretty bland.

I actually liked the game at first, but it's certainly pretty mediocre. It's the sort of thing I wish the devs could've taken a second shot at, hopefully with better direction and planning.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

just because you think it's harder then Skyrim or Dark Souls doesn't excuse the fact that it's still an easy game even when put on hard. it even has a "KILL EVERYTHING ON SCREEN" button.

So what's the excuse for Skyrim and Dark Souls? That is my whole point. KoA gets knocked for X when X exists (and usually worse) in another RPG that gets praised. I'm not saying KoA is better, just merely it's the same in many regards to other games. Skyrim and Dark Souls get GOTY nominations while KoA doesn't, it seems like a complete double standard to me. I'm not asking to raise KoA up, I'm asking to knock all the other games (with the same flaws) down.

But as others have said (multiple times) the other games have features that either play-down those flaws or negate them completely.

For example: Dragon Age has a generic story, negated by the amazing character interaction and the story being well polished for what it is.

KOA on the other-hand doesn't have anything stand-out about it, at best it's average at everything.

KoA has its features too like the combat and art style. Dark Souls is a straight dungeon crawler and its combat sucks and is damn easy, that pretty much ruins the game. Hell, Dark Souls doesn't really even have loot for the most part, the game is about leveling up what you already got.

This could all be said about Dark Souls and even worse (as the game is so exploitable it's not even funny) besides for the questing complaint because Dark Souls doesn't even have any quests:

I thought it was alright, but the fact is that it was piss-easy, crazy exploitable (to make it even easier than it already is), and it wasn't exactly great looking. In addition, most of the quests were pretty bland.

---

Side thing when it comes to best RPG Combat for me it goes to Dragons Dogma I enjoyed KoA combat and trying out the builds but Dogma hit that sweet spot for me IMO.

I may have to try Dragon's Dogma at some point but I'm not a fan of fantasy WRPGs (yeah, I know it's Japanese developed). I tried KoA because 1) it was free, 2) I actually like the art style, and 3) the combat is fun. Most fantasy WRPGs have a bland art style and poor combat. I really what RPGs that take place in different worlds with new races, classes, enemies, lore, etc.

 

[Riot3000]

I may have to try Dragon's Dogma at some point but I'm not a fan of fantasy WRPGs (yeah, I know it's Japanese developed). I tried KoA because 1) it was free, 2) I actually like the art style, and 3) the combat is fun. Most fantasy WRPGs have a bland art style and poor combat. I really what RPGs that take place in different worlds with new races, classes, enemies, lore, etc.[/quote]

That is why I love Dragons Dogma holding on to a dragon whiles its in mid air stabbing its heart while trying not to fall to your death is the opposite of boring combat.

Though it does not do anything new it takes a different approach to it like fighting group of goblins when suddenly a griffen swoops down for no reason but to ruin your day. There is a verb for it among dogma fans called getting griffened.

My dream game is the art style similar to KoA and the mechanics of Dragons Dogma

 

[lapan]

Dude, the only the difference between the weapons are the power attack and the special attack (up + R2 I think). The weapons in KoA are way different compared to Dark Souls.

You can pull enemies to you one-by-one the whole fucking game.

Maybe if you only count weapons of the same class. It's however entirely different if you use a sword, an halberd, a dagger, a bow/crossbow or even a shield. That's not even counting magic and magic's interactions with weapons

So... just like every other game, even KoA. How is Dark Souls better, different, or special?

I never said it was, i just meant you were simplifying it a bit too much

 

[Bombiz]

just because you think it's harder then Skyrim or Dark Souls doesn't excuse the fact that it's still an easy game even when put on hard. it even has a "KILL EVERYTHING ON SCREEN" button.

So what's the excuse for Skyrim and Dark Souls? That is my whole point. KoA gets knocked for X when X exists (and usually worse) in another RPG that gets praised. I'm not saying KoA is better, just merely it's the same in many regards to other games. Skyrim and Dark Souls get GOTY nominations while KoA doesn't, it seems like a complete double standard to me. I'm not asking to raise KoA up, I'm asking to knock all the other games (with the same flaws) down.

But as others have said (multiple times) the other games have features that either play-down those flaws or negate them completely.

For example: Dragon Age has a generic story, negated by the amazing character interaction and the story being well polished for what it is.

KOA on the other-hand doesn't have anything stand-out about it, at best it's average at everything.

KoA has its features too like the combat and art style. Dark Souls is a straight dungeon crawler and its combat sucks and is damn easy, that pretty much ruins the game. Hell, Dark Souls doesn't really even have loot for the most part, the game is about leveling up what you already got.

This could all be said about Dark Souls and even worse (as the game is so exploitable it's not even funny) besides for the questing complaint because Dark Souls doesn't even have any quests:
.

So? whats wrong with lvling up what you got? It's like enchanting/upgrading your weapons in any other game. And if i wanted a game that focused on loot i would play something like Titain Quest, Diablo, Path of Exile, Torchlight 1 & 2...... Also Dark Souls does have Quests. Their just not as defined as in most other games.

 

[saxman234]

I'm still confused with saying that every enemy in Dark Souls can be fought one on one. Thinking about almost every area in the game, you are faced with more than one enemy and usually a combination of enemies. I just played through the painted world again today, and there were multiple points where an archer would be firing at me, while a guy that shoots giant fire blasts are attacking me at a range, while 2 other enemies are charging you, plus those charging enemies poison you if you are too close to you when you kill them. Other parts of the level have two crow humans flying towards you at the same time. The day before I played through Tomb of the Giants, where a giant four legged skeleton charges you, while a guy with a giant bow is firing at you. The game is all about timing, and you can't cheese through most of the enemies one on one. Plus most of the boss battles are test in timing, stamina management, and smart dodging.

Also every weapon is very different in Dark Souls. Each weapon has very different speed, range, and play styles. A halberd has a completely different moveset from a katana, which is completely different from a greatsword, is completely different from a club. Plus each one is very different in timing. I'm confused why you say that you don't have to time your attacks, when the entire game is about timing your attacks.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I never said it was, i just meant you were simplifying it a bit too much

Most Dark Souls players love the game because they feel that they are playing some hard, complex, and non-casual game and that is almost as far from the truth as you can get. The only thing that gives Dark Souls any difficulty whatsoever is the lack of a checkpoint system of other games or a save anywhere system. I believe this whole discussion sprung from one of those type of Dark Souls players, not you (as you replied to my reply of another poster) so I'm not saying you said Dark Souls was anything. Dark Souls is really one of the simplest RPGs I've played, it's just that the game doesn't tell you anything about its mechanics so you have to find out everything on your own. I'd rather have some hand-holding teaching me mechanics that are complex instead of no teaching with very simplistic mechanics.

So? whats wrong with lvling up what you got? It's like enchanting/upgrading your weapons in any other game. And if i wanted a game that focused on loot i would play something like Titain Quest, Diablo, Path of Exile, Torchlight 1 & 2...... Also Dark Souls does have Quests. Their just not as defined as in most other games.

Nothing really. It's that Dark Souls combat is very simplistic is the main problem. Also, as a dungeon crawler, you should have a decent loot system. Or at least have something to level up other than the literal stats of your stuff; yeah, you could put an element on the weapon but then you lose the scaling with your Str/Dex stat. KoA allows you to put gems on your gear to get a wide variety of bonuses. The main quest is literally ring 2 bells, which opens up something that I already forgot what it was.

I'm still confused with saying that every enemy in Dark Souls can be fought one on one. Thinking about almost every area in the game, you are faced with more than one enemy and usually a combination of enemies. I just played through the painted world again today, and there were multiple points where an archer would be firing at me, while a guy that shoots giant fire blasts are attacking me at a range, while 2 other enemies are charging you, plus those charging enemies poison you if you are too close to you when you kill them. Other parts of the level have two crow humans flying towards you at the same time. The day before I played through Tomb of the Giants, where a giant four legged skeleton charges you, while a guy with a giant bow is firing at you. The game is all about timing, and you can't cheese through most of the enemies one on one. Plus most of the boss battles are test in timing, stamina management, and smart dodging.

Also every weapon is very different in Dark Souls. Each weapon has very different speed, range, and play styles. A halberd has a completely different moveset from a katana, which is completely different from a greatsword, is completely different from a club. Plus each one is very different in timing. I'm confused why you say that you don't have to time your attacks, when the entire game is about timing your attacks.

You can pull one enemy at a time at you if you hit them with a bow and arrow/crossbow throughout pretty much the whole game. Most of the bosses are a joke, they are just enemies with more HP basically and you can somehow block most of their attacks with a light shield. The 4 Kings I think are supposed to be hard, but I killed them so fast that more than 1 of them were never out at a time.

What game doesn't have different movesets and playstyles for every type of weapon? Dark Souls didn't do anything new or different with that.

 

[KingDragonlord]

I'm playing the game now too (though I bought it back when it first came out.) The game is pretty, the combat is actually kind of fun. I'd say its worth playing but its not in the same league as the other games being discussed in this thread. I think if there had been a sequel to KOA, it could have certainly had the potential to stand with the big boys.

But its just not fully realized. Its one true advantage over the other games in the list is the combat system and as others in this thread have pointed out, a good combat system is fine but its just not what rpg fans play rpgs for. Its like saying your nightclub is awesome because there's cake. You want to take pity on someone who misses the mark so earnestly. We're looking for a good story, interesting characters, stuff that feels meaningful.

KOA doesn't feel meaningful and it should with its premise about breaking fate. It just doesn't have a gripping story. There's a world thats fairly well conceived but thats it. There aren't characters so much as ideas for characters. There's a lot of telling and not showing when it comes to characters. And the story just doesn't grab us. You get told early on that you break fate, and you have to go figure out what that means but it just amounts to nothing.

I confess I can't really put my finger on it.

By comparison.

Skyrim feels more like a living world you're exploring. You're going to see characters out and about, encounter monsters and events, and the world design goes for more realistic graphics giving you a lot of almost real looking stunning nature shots. Its a world you just want to explore for its own sake. The music is a valuable but overlooked component too. Skyrim makes great use of it, especially in tying it in with the dragons, shouting, and the lore surrounding these things. The world also reacts somewhat to you.

Dragon Age Origins may have a generic fantasy plot but they tell it well and there are a lot of interesting subversions and playing around with the standard fantasy tropes. And as I'm sure everyone has said, the characters, dear lord the characters. I swear Bioware plays a game with themselves where they see just how far they can go with a character and make you still like them. I hated Morrigan, she won me over. I hated Jack (Mass Effect), she won me over. And there's an intimacy with the characters in that game in particular that I'll never forget. Those conversations around the fire with that peaceful, enchanting and slightly haunting camp music, those moments were special. The game has a lot of layers to it as well, like how fate seems to have chosen you to do this task but it doesn't feel like you're a chosen one, like you're gifted or special. You're just a hero like many and you're stepping up now because there's nobody else in your position to do so.

 

[beastro]

And in Borderlands since every enemy is set to a certain level, you become overleveled if you do all sidequests (the game is a cakewalk) and underleveled (enemies become bullet sponges) if you do no sidequests. Both scaling systems have their issues. I totally blew through the Zombie DLC in Borderlands because my level was too high, there's was no way to play that DLC at a proper level without starting the game over. Borderlands and almost every RPG has scaling issues, the flaws ARE IN basically every RPG.

So Skyrim just becomes artificially difficult then? You know, where the enemies get so much health and do so much damage that it's fake difficulty instead of being actually challenging:

The thing is, I don't mind the set level system. I loved it in Morrowind and really loved it in Everquest, both TES games in general and EQ are exploration games and both listed found you easily wandering into dangerous territory avoid your abilities and leading to a quick death, which leaves you marking places to return to later and adds in a mix of danger and suspense that leveled mob games lack.

Borderlands does get easy, but you can play within its system and make it enjoyable, Amalur completely lacked that as keeping to your level to level appropriate areas still was a cake walk.

The artificial difficulty in Skyrim isn't bad, save for those one shots. On EQ Live I played a Druid who'd quad kite mobs and if you screwed up, you quickly got beat down by the four mobs, or worse were Bards who could kite whole zones and had to be absolutely perfect and attuned to their systems lag (which was a fact of reality dealing with dozens of mobs chasing you). Oblivion (And Fallout 3 with set mob level mod) didn't have the one shots, but you could get beat down very fast. It it was enjoyable, and very thrilling to take on mobs far beyond your level, especially when you applied tricks like grabbing the sword for the Clavicus Vile quest by buying a horse, then luring the Orc chick wielding it to the Imperial City so the cities guards could beat her to death as you watched them with glee as dozens died before she finally went down.

 

[ERaptor]

-snip-

Like others have stated, you come over as a huge troll who so desperately wanted to to argue how KoA is good that he made a thread about it and repeats the same arguments over and over and over. A few things:

You can not excuse the flaws KoA had by simply pointing at an other game that had the same flaw. KoA tried to combine a lot of mechanics and aspects that were great in other Games and thus lost focus. As others pointed out, the Combat is great at first, but becomes immensely repetetive. The Story looses itself 10 feet outside of the first Dungeon, and the Sidequests are generic MMO-Quests who rarely manage to hook you in. The Characters and setting are as bland as the so called "Tolkien-Fantasy" you are calling out. It's just that the game play extra pretentious by giving them different names. Watch Yahtzees Zero Punctuation Episode about the Game, he sums it up in the first Minute pretty nicely. The Characters were horribly uninteresting, only sticking around long enough to give their generic sidequest or vomit exposition at you.

Now, of course i could point at Borderlands and say that it has the same bland sidequests. And at Skyrim for either bland Characters or simplistic combat. Or at Dark Souls for having expoitable Combat. Etc. etc. etc.

But fact is, KoA had all of them combined. It tried to get a bit of everything and landed flat on its face. You certainly get your moneys worth in content, but the content is mediocre. Its "Ok", its working, but nothing more. I played around 10 hours and then layed it down never to touch it again. About the only part i found done nicely without anything to bash, was the presentation. The World looked very nice and i liked the enviroments.


Now, about your Dark Souls complaints. First of all, yes its true that there are a lot of occassions where you _can_ abuse systems to ease or outright cheat around the difficulty. But if you do that, you are playing the game wrong. Amalur's Combat is the same. Its absolutely winnable by just mashing LMB and using Dodge ocassionally. Thats it. But if you do that, you are limiting yourself. The Combat only gets really interesting if you actually use the Arsenal given to you.

About the exploitable DS Bosses:

I actually had one Seath encounter where he would spam the one Crystal attack that doesnt cover his belly. It made the encounter a lot easier, but that only happened to me once. The Taurus Demon falling off the Wall is a feature, not a bug. There's an obvious hole in the wall, and if you're playing a build that has enough Stamina and a decent shield, you can usually bait him into doing a backwards jump into the abyss. But its just as possible that he spams his smashes at you, depleting your stamina and thus fu*king you over. But its allways possible to get lucky. The Gaping Dragon can be baited into doing lengthy Smashing Moves or a charge, he takes a while to get back up and can be easily slashed or shot at while he does those attacks. If he hits you however, its potentitally a one-shot. Infernal Discharge can be thrown into the Lava Pit next to his Arena. And lastly, the Iron Golem can be toppled as well, if done next to one of the broken pillars he will trip over the wall and die instantly. This is all a feature, its a reward for thinking around the Encounter and trying to be smart. Especially Discharge and the Golem can take a ton of punishment if you're not playing something heavy, so the game offers an alternative.

The undead dragons can indeed be killed by arrows, btw. But if you stand there and pump 300 Arrows into an Enemy who cant reach you, and then complain about the Game being too easy, i'd recommend thinking about the whole thing again.

Meanwhile, in Amalur: LMB-lMB-LMB-Dodgeroll-LMB-LMB-LMB-Dodgeroll-LIMIT BREAK *everything dies*

What im trying to say, you can easily "break" most Games by abusing certain factors. But thats not a valid complaint when you're trying to sell Amalur as such a great Action RPG. Like others said, the best comparison is that its an Offline MMO. Trying everything, exceeding at nothing. I'd really like to see a sequel where they try to get some focus going. Theres certainly potential in the Game, its just buried by generic, uninteresting RPG-Features from other Games.

PS.

Just as a clarification. I've seen people playing Dark Souls completely naked, on level 1, with the starting Club you get from playing the Hobo. And they completed the game. It's absolutely possible that the Game is subjectively easy for some cracks, but that doesnt mean that its not a ton more difficult than most other Games of this generation.