Kingdoms of Amalur

It's an MMO that failed to be an MMO.

It literally is not.

They were making an MMO and when they ran out of money they repackaged everything they had into a single player game and the company went bankrupt soon after.

A coherent story.
I enjoyed the premise and the resolution but the actual execution was weak. People joke about it feeling like a singleplayer MMO for a reason.

Attached: 20200512194329_1.jpg (1600x900, 219.06K)

Nope. They were making both an MMO and a SP only game. Reckoning is the SP only game.

>game has unique armor sets for different level ranges
>you will never get use out of them because all loot is randomized
>blacksmithing generic armor and weapons is better anyways
fucking why did you do this to me game

Attached: 1471670060210.jpg (650x650, 282.78K)

I remember really liking it back in the day, I'll probably play the remaster some time

It's just a generic attempt at copying WoW's aesthetic and generic fantasy setting. They even claimed they would turn this into an MMO at some point.

you forgot
>all player armor looks like dogshit compared to NPC outfits

nah

RA Salvatore is a mediocre author writing books about a universe he didn't create, but did put the biggest group faggots lead by a marty stu into that universe
it's not surprising that the story in KoA sucks massive cock

for

soul

The story isn't very good despite having R.A.S. write it and the zones feel like MMO levels that you outlevel before you're even 50% done with them
oh and then ENDING IS BAD. NES game 'A Winner is You!' tier

>ENDING IS BAD
Why?

>Great Combat
lol
>Interesting lore
lol
>Timeless aesthetic
I will give you this one.
>Unique builds
lol
>fullly voice acted
oh wow man

Attached: 1637713006740.gif (352x240, 853.75K)

>great combat
button masher with air combos, repetitive and done better literally everywhere else that does it
>interesting lore
10,000 proper nouns doesn't make a token 'evil lord wants to invade the realm' setting any more interesting
>timeless aesthetic
it's a chinese knock-off of world of warcraft's aesthetic from the modelling to the color palette
>unique builds
i guess, but they feed into the same low-hotkey-count button mashing
>fully voice acted
literally who cares? that was impressive in the late 90s and hasn't been for the 20+ years since.

Attached: 8463153145641.gif (480x269, 1.68M)

I really liked Amalur and I want a sequel that improves upon the first, it's the closest thing to a Fable Sequel we got.
I hope Re-Reckoning sold well enough.

That part is literally the only lore I remember at all from this game and I liked it enough to rip it off in my shitty D&D homebrew setting. I couldn't tell you anything else that happens in this game if you had a gun to my head.

I thought this was Genn Greymane.

Attached: 1571844638889.jpg (1200x800, 140.43K)

Miserable faggot

It's a shame that there aren't more games about seelie/unseelie/faerie shit, given the interesting myths around them and that they were the best part of the game. Amalur had some good ideas, but the cobbled together release really was just a singleplayer MMO. It's like they tried to turn it into something akin to Fable once they knew they were gonna bankrupt a state but never found the charm of it.
I think the dark court faerie lord was the final boss? I'm in the same boat of not remembering anything about the plot outside of the house of ballads.

This game has John Cygan's last VA performance

It just feels like a shitty early 2000s MMO
And the combat is fucking dogshit what are you on about, so stiff and repetitive, it may as well be a point and click game

It was originally an mmo and it shows, tons of soul-less sidequests for mmo tier grind, and main story is forgettable tolkien copy

missing coom tier armors.

when this came out I was playing it on a shitty crt so most of the lore was lost on me. still made it to the desert, it just got so repetitive up to that point. the spider forest was pretty comfy though

I try to keep playing this but I hear about the level lock or whatever for the different zones so I'm always nervous about how much I can explore without fucking up the gameplay.

Even bought the Switch version to encourage a proper playthrough but it runs like shit.

>It was originally an mmo
No.

>I hear about the level lock or whatever for the different zones
The original version does this, the remaster (which includes the version you bought) changed this.

"Amalur is a single-player interpretation of the MMO (albeit one that was originally intended to be an MMO)"

>(albeit one that was originally intended to be an MMO)"
Nope.

Most 6/10 game in existence. Best part of it was being able to save and marry the evil fae lady.

Neat. I also have it for PC so I think I'll give it another go, thanks boo.

Imagine unironically saying there's anything great about this piece of garbage

Attached: 1627176406948.png (1920x1080, 1.78M)

>bought the Switch version to encourage a proper playthrough but it runs like shit

Attached: 1644963569237.jpg (480x622, 41.11K)

Nope

That game came out on ps3, how can switch not run it?

Didn't this game bankrupt rhode island?

I unironically think it's the movement and structure of the world. It's like Fable, the whole world is designed around awkward 'roads' and your movement is functional but restrictive. You can't jump, you can't climb, you can't really explore if you're stuck planted to the ground like a fucking goober. Every open world game that has that 'it' factor has a good sense of freedom of movement. And the game doesn't really have anything else to offer that's truly 'wow' in terms of content. Sure, the combat is fun for an RPG, but it's not amazing. The writing is functional, but not gripping. The setting is fine, but it's not unique.

It's a 7/10 at everything (Sans movement) but not a 9/10 in any one area and that makes it too bland to stick with or grab you.

I had a ton of fun with it, but I know what you mean. The world and lore is very bland. It needed more variety like mountains and underground zones, key item equipment, giant trees, etc.

I think it's the enemies. The variety and ai really suck, especially the bosses

>Sure, the combat is fun for an RPG
The combat is fucking garbage, what are you talking about?
The first Diablo has more involved and complex combat than this mindless piece of shit

Attached: 1648211323831.webm (700x392, 2.61M)

you nailed it user. Quality post.

Attached: 1646354377017.jpg (3000x2164, 673.56K)

i can see aesthetic similarities to fable but i don't get why these two titles are compared all the time. amalur lacked all of the 'simulator' elements that made fable stand out from its peers. the missing 'it' factor OP is referring to is an autistic and overly ambitious project lead like molyneux that would make decisions outside of the lockstep cookie cutter format they chose for amalur. amalur was basically the horizon series before that series existed: lots of high quality ingredients mixed haphazardly producing an unremarkable shit soup.

Attached: 1263786123.png (1200x1488, 817.84K)

>amalur was basically the horizon series before that series existed
Put the crack pipe down, user.

>The first Diablo has more involved and complex combat than this mindless piece of shit
The first Diablo is a literal piece of shit.

Try using more than one button.

Attached: max fov.webm (960x540, 2.78M)

Give me Amalur 2 so we can get more weapons and magic

Wow that looks like dogshit

I just want more co-op ARPGs, man. Dark Alliance was such a crushing disappointment.

fine, fair: amalur was received even less enthusiastically than the horizon series because it wasn't a platform flagship title. the point was that both worked incredibly hard to produce a 'meh' experience that didn't land with audiences.

Exactly
No reason to, the shitty combat and enemy design aren't conductive to real gameplay, no matter how hard you try to convince people that mindless Square>Square>Square spam against punching bags is good combat

Attached: 1624047078136.webm (900x506, 2.23M)