[Scarlet Devil]

Money doesn't still go to them? I'm pretty sure money still goes to them, regardless of where you buy the game. Am I wrong?

Of course it goes to them. Just because it doesn't involve Origin doesn't mean it's not EA related.

[NAtIVe GOddess]

Of course it goes to them. Just because it doesn't involve Origin doesn't mean it's not EA related.

Exactly why I'm not buying it.

[Kerri Lee]

Money doesn't still go to them? I'm pretty sure money still goes to them, regardless of where you buy the game. Am I wrong?

EA doesn't own 38 studios, EA just published their game. And as EA hates Steam nowadays 38 studios put it on Steam on their own. So, all the money from Steam sale (minus Valve's cut, of course) goes to 38.

[scorpion972]

EA doesn't own 38 studios, EA just published their game. And as EA hates Steam nowadays 38 studios put it on Steam on their own. So, all the money from Steam sale (minus Valve's cut, of course) goes to 38.

I'm almost certain percentage of all copies of a game funded by a publisher go to that publisher, regardless of the distribution channel or distributor. Can you link somewhere that says EA doesn't get a cut of the Steam profits? I'd like to support the developer, but I can't justify it with EA attached.

[Tamara Dost]

EA doesn't own 38 studios, EA just published their game. And as EA hates Steam nowadays 38 studios put it on Steam on their own. So, all the money from Steam sale (minus Valve's cut, of course) goes to 38.

That would mean the publisher has an agreement with 38 that they could publish on their own. I've never seen such stupid publishing not esp for EA so I don't think that's what's happening.

[Pumpkin]

EA doesn't own 38 studios, EA just published their game. And as EA hates Steam nowadays 38 studios put it on Steam on their own. So, all the money from Steam sale (minus Valve's cut, of course) goes to 38.

It would be really silly for EA to publish and fund Amalur without asking for a cut.

[kat no x]

If you guys really want to know if EA gets any cut from the Steam sales, why not register and post the question on the KoA:R forum. Curt Schilling answers almost every question asked to him there. If involvement of EA is preventing you from buying this great game, I am sure he can clear that up himself.

[Jonathan Braz]

I'm almost certain percentage of all copies of a game funded by a publisher go to that publisher, regardless of the distribution channel or distributor. Can you link somewhere that says EA doesn't get a cut of the Steam profits? I'd like to support the developer, but I can't justify it with EA attached.

I think i saw it somewhere officially, but can't find anything but forum pvssyr right now

[Gavin Roberts]

It would be really silly for EA to publish and fund Amalur without asking for a cut.

Most likely 38 Studios did a sub licensing deal with EA for a set fee to self publish the game on Steam. That way EA got their cut up front, and 38 Studios gets the proceeds per Steam sale.

[Andy durkan]

Help EA out like you would an attention seeking friend.

When they do something bad, like re-hashing a sports game with little to no improvement while at the same time trying to rob people with online content... like in "FIFA '11" or "Tiger Woods '12"...

Don't buy the game.

When they do something good, like helping release "Alice: The Madness Returns", "Dead Space", "Mirror's Edge" and "Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning"...

Buy the game.

Affirm their good deeds. Shun the bad ones.

EA are like a dear alcoholic uncle who keeps falling off the wagon when it comes to taking advantage of their Customer base but that which they do good should be encouraged.

With the right encouragement we might get back to "EA Sports... It's In The Game" instead of "EA Sports... It's In The Bank"!

Az

[Crystal Clear]

Positive reinforcement does not work with alcoholics. It doesn't work with companies like EA, either. Valve? Maybe. Bethesda? Maybe. EA/Activision? Nope. They get more than enough positive reinforcement about all the junk they make -- not to mention the horrible working conditions they force their staff to work under -- so, for me, it remains a firm No to giving them money for the foreseeable future.

[David Chambers]

Positive reinforcement does not work with alcoholics. It doesn't work with companies like EA, either. Valve? Maybe. Bethesda? Maybe. EA/Activision? Nope. They get more than enough positive reinforcement about all the junk they make -- not to mention the horrible working conditions they force their staff to work under -- so, for me, it remains a firm No to giving them money for the foreseeable future.

If they're supported by those who buy their junk, but you don't contribute to support of their quality games, they'll stop publishing and making quality games entirely.

They aren't going to change their tune if they're still making profit, so boycotting both the games you wouldn't buy anyway and the games you want isn't going to work if they're still selling games to everyone else.

[Rowena]

EA/Activision? Nope. They get more than enough positive reinforcement about all the junk they make -- not to mention the horrible working conditions they force their staff to work under -- so, for me, it remains a firm No to giving them money for the foreseeable future.

About 6 months ago I wouldn't buy an EA game on principle.

They used to make great games and then begain to make a mess of great games to the point that EA as the publisher guaranteed nothing more than a "shop" feature in the menus.

They've gotten better though so I'll enjoy great games they publish and a part of me will be grateful that the corprate beast allowed a game like "Alice: The Madness Returns" to see the light of day.

Even "Activision" have bettered themselves with the latest edition of "Modern Warfare 3" which is a huge improvement over the shoddy but easily accessible multiplayer they offered in the past.

Unfortunately you're only hurting yourself by missing out on a gem like "Kingdom's of Amalur" though.

Az

[Ria dell]

X-play Reviewd it a 2.5 out of 10 .-. is the game really that bad I missed most of the review but what i heard was that all enemies possible show up really early on in the game and boss battles are uber easy and major let down and i think was something on poor dialog?

is the game seriously that bad?

[Adam Porter]

As far as the writing goes, there have been certain games released with much weaker writing, though they weren't quite hit for it to the extent that this was. Just saying.

As for the enemies, a number of them repeat, but I am thirty hours in and I keep coming across new enemies fairly often. Can't say it will be the same further down the road. The game is easy though. If anything, it is the boss battles that present any real challange in the game. They are supposedly bringing out a harder difficulty down the road, but I think that's little more than rumor at this point.

Still a pretty damn good game, not really deserving of such bad reviews. Then again, it is more or less opinion.

[Carlitos Avila]

X-play Reviewd it a 2.5 out of 10 .-. is the game really that bad I missed most of the review but what i heard was that all enemies possible show up really early on in the game and boss battles are uber easy and major let down and i think was something on poor dialog?

is the game seriously that bad?

No, some boss battles are insanely difficult, tolerates zero mistake. Your Sheperd set won't help on these battles. The dialogues are above average. Scroll up a bit and we have scored it through different factors.

[Austin Suggs]

X-play Reviewd it a 2.5 out of 10 .-. is the game really that bad I missed most of the review but what i heard was that all enemies possible show up really early on in the game and boss battles are uber easy and major let down and i think was something on poor dialog?

is the game seriously that bad?

No, it's really good. No idea what that review's on about -- I was constantly running into new monster types. As for the dialogue and voice acting... it's actually really good. Here's the thing you have to keep in mind: this is not supposed to be a deep game. It is an involving game, but it's not a deep game. What it is, is a gloss of RPGs of the past 20 years, basically. Also, the boss battles are tough.

Reviewers seem to be reviewing this game through a particularly weird lens: they are reviewing it for something it's not trying to be. It's not trying to be a Skyrim or a Witcher 2. It's meant to be a fun, escapist, schlocky, enjoyable romp. And it does that so, so well. You could really be missing out if you don't at least give it a chance to impress you.

See my review, second post from the top.

Note: the demo does not do the game justice. The first few hours are easily the worst of the game. And they aren't that bad, actually.

[Sheila Esmailka]

I've been playing a straight up longsword warrior to level 23 and a mage/finesse to level 18.
Really liking the spells available, even though they're limited. The fire spell is great when upgraded, takes care of any minor mob in 1-2 hits and is semi-aoe. Really nice for clearing trash mobs you really don't care to fight.
But now I play the warrior, which is a whole lot more fun than warrior classes usually are in games.

My main annoyance right now is that the Armor sets are too weak. I keep replacing them with purple or blue gear, and the yellow set pieces often look better and have a unique model.

[Sara Johanna Scenariste]

what about leveling up some kind of god mode that makes short work of everything ?

[u gone see]

X-play Reviewd it a 2.5 out of 10 .-. is the game really that bad I missed most of the review but what i heard was that all enemies possible show up really early on in the game and boss battles are uber easy and major let down and i think was something on poor dialog?

is the game seriously that bad?

I think that might be a mistake.Adam Sessler and x-play usually do a 1-5 scale on game ratings.So my guess is that it is suppose to be a 2.5 out of 5, which is still poor. Honestly though I don't agree with the review it's a 7.5/10 in my book. Take in to consideration that I'm only about 10 hours in.

[Liv Brown]

what about leveling up some kind of god mode that makes short work of everything ?

Reckoning mode? Yeah... that's kind of the point of it. You get to use it once you fill up a metre on your screen. I like it. It's gamey, in a good way. Reminds me of 90s fighting games.

[Grace Francis]

No, it's really good. No idea what that review's on about -- I was constantly running into new monster types. As for the dialogue and voice acting... it's actually really good. Here's the thing you have to keep in mind: this is not supposed to be a deep game. It is an involving game, but it's not a deep game. What it is, is a gloss of RPGs of the past 20 years, basically. Also, the boss battles are tough.

Reviewers seem to be reviewing this game through a particularly weird lens: they are reviewing it for something it's not trying to be. It's not trying to be a Skyrim or a Witcher 2. It's meant to be a fun, escapist, schlocky, enjoyable romp. And it does that so, so well. You could really be missing out if you don't at least give it a chance to impress you.

See my review, second post from the top.

Note: the demo does not do the game justice. The first few hours are easily the worst of the game. And they aren't that bad, actually.

Can't say I agree with you on the voice acting, it's rather spotty. Some of it is solid but other parts are downright painful whether it's from a lack of quality or trying too hard.

Just because a game isn't trying to be something doesn't mean it can't be knocked for it especially when it's a dull story and generic world.

[natalie mccormick]

My main annoyance right now is that the Armor sets are too weak. I keep replacing them with purple or blue gear, and the yellow set pieces often look better and have a unique model.

Yeah, the crafted gear I've been making keeps dwarfing the unique-model purples and yellows I find. High-rank Blacksmithing & Sagecrafting seems like it's almost as powerful as power-leveled Smithing/Enchanting in Skyrim.
(I'm in the mid 20's. My crafted longsword is 150-160 damage, and my total armor is nearing 800. And that's with a few "found" armor pieces equipped.)

----

I don't see the game as "Skyrim, with more action". I see it more as "Diablo, with more RPG". And it's quite successful like that.

[Bek Rideout]

Can't say I agree with you on the voice acting, it's rather spotty. Some of it is solid but other parts are downright painful whether it's from a lack of quality or trying too hard.

It's not Mass Effect or Portal, but it holds its own well enough. For me, the voice acting was alright but the sound editing was not. There was too much manipulation of the baseline in some areas -- voices are often too echoey, or too dull, or too metallic...

Just because a game isn't trying to be something doesn't mean it can't be knocked for it especially when it's a dull story and generic world.

You can't judge, say, Harry Potter against The Lord of the Rings, or Perdido Street Station against... Ghormenghast. They aim for, and achieve, totally different things, but they're all decent books in their own right. Now, if KoA were the equivalent of Twilight... But it's not.

The world may be generic, but not all that populates it is. It does enough new or uncommon stuff to not totally bore you.

[Heather M]

It's not Mass Effect or Portal, but it holds its own well enough. For me, the voice acting was alright but the sound editing was not. There was too much manipulation of the baseline in some areas -- voices are often too echoey, or too dull, or too metallic...



You can't judge, say, Harry Potter against The Lord of the Rings, or Perdido Street Station against... Ghormenghast. They aim for, and achieve, totally different things, but they're all decent books in their own right. Now, if KoA were the equivalent of Twilight... But it's not.

The world may be generic, but not all that populates it is. It does enough new or uncommon stuff to not totally bore you.

Eh, I think it would be best if there is a sequel to not include R.A. Salvatore.It's safe to say he is partly to blame on it's generic qualities.