Two Worlds II or Kingdoms of Amular - Better experience?

#1 Edited by Zuon (25 posts) -

I've been in the mood for a B-movie style RPG recently, and even though there are plenty of them out there, I've come to a decision between Two Worlds II and Kingdoms of Amular: Reckoning. I have downloaded the demos of both games, but I can't decide which one I want to try first before purchasing the full product.

Could someone please outline the pros and cons of each game for me? I have been doing a bit of research, but it would be nice to have this info in one place rather than having to switch between multiple sites I found on google. Thank you.

#2 Edited by SovietsUnited (1773 posts) -

Out of those I'd recommend Two Worlds II. Both games are pretty good, but Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning is kinda soulless while Two Worlds has plenty of that European RPG charm.

#3 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (8571 posts) -

"Better Experience" is such a vague term. What are you looking for exactly... What do you value most ? Your "experience " can be influenced by anything.

#4 Posted by SovietsUnited (1773 posts) -

"Better Experience" is such a vague term. What are you looking for exactly... What do you value most ? Your "experience " can be influenced by anything.

As in which game is better overall

#5 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (8571 posts) -

@SovietsUnited

Yeah... In my experience people who say that just don't know how to compatmentalize the things they value most in a game. Infact in most cases if the part of a game people value more is good enough then they can literally disregard all other flaws..... Especially when it comes to completely subjective things like Atmosphere, Narrative, Caharacters, Score....

#6 Edited by Ish_basic (3888 posts) -

KoA is like a modern mmo on an empty server...mindless questing with silly objectives and a story you can't possibly care about trying to tie it all together to make it seem like something more than the level grind it is. Kurt Schilling is a big mmo fan and he started the company to make an mmo...so it's not surprising KoA turned out like this. Soulless really is a great way to describe it, but if you love the 'ding' of leveling up and min/maxing your characters, you might enjoy it.

I'm too much of a graphics whore to play Two Worlds 2. I've heard some good things about it and tried to play it, but it looks like something you see hanging on a refrigerator next to the dried noodle mosaic. Animations are terrible, too. But that was the PS3 version.

#7 Edited by Zuon (25 posts) -

Thank you all for your comments. What I value in an RPG are:

1. Strategic combat that involves more than pure button mashing, like planning your loadout and making sure you have enough potions

2. MORE than just the combat. Minigames, crafting, and variations of sidequests are always fun.

3. A good world to immerse yourself in. Something that looks the part and encourages exploration, for those times where you want to take a break from doing anything of importance.

4. Interesting (enough) characters to populate the world so I don't feel entirely pointless being in the game.

5. (Optional) I love it when cutscenes are well-directed and fun to watch.

6. It would be nice to have that passive feeling you get when the developers really put a lot of their effort into crafting an enjoyable game.

Does this help anyone at all?

#8 Edited by SovietsUnited (1773 posts) -

Kingdoms of Amalur has superior combat compared to TW2; the former has a good combat system reminiscent of DMC/God of War and it requires a small degree of skill, especially when compared to the mindless hacking and slashing of Two Worlds 2, which in addition is pretty clunky

Both games feature a lot of side quests, and they are fun and varied to a degree. The main drawback from KoA is that it's highly generic and very uninspired, it all looks like it was taken from prior games, and many of it's world and art design in general derives from Fable and World of Warcraft. Add in boring story and forgettable lore and the lack of soul and heart becomes apparent

Two Worlds 2 doesn't deviate too much from standard RPG design either, but the aforementioned charm is what carried it for me; the game doesn't take itself too seriously. Two Worlds 2 has a sense of humor and is lighthearted to an extent. The writing and voice acting is cheesy, sure, but that's a part of the charm; TW2 has a sense of humor and is mostly lighthearted compared to the standard fantasy fare of KoA. There is a feeling of pure, sincere Fantasy RPG about it, similar to the Divinity games, hard to describe on my part.

There is an over-encompassing artificial feel about KoA, contrasting to TW 2 which felt to me like a project of passion. This directly affected everything else in my experience; TW 2's characters felt more memorable and legitimate, the world more believable and immersive. This comes to play in the cutscenes you mentioned as well; TW 2 has over-the-top cutscenes like a dark knight figthing an orc swordsman with extreme choreography, while KoA's are reserved for boring dialogues, introductions etc.

That's not to say Amalur isn't polished; the animations are fluid, graphics vibrant and colorful and the combat is fun and precise; all miles ahead of TW 2.

So, to conclude, I'd personally recommend Two Worlds over KoA, but then again I have a very specific taste when it comes to RPGs. If you prefer better combat and Fable + WoW sounds like a good mix, by all means buy KoA: Reckoning. If you ask me, you can't go wrong with either.

#9 Edited by Zuon (25 posts) -

I finally gave in and played a bit of the demos of both. KoA honestly kind of bored me, so I quit right after I finished the tutorial. TWII on the other hand, does in fact have that charm you mentioned, and that sense of humor and the characters is what kept me going. Thank you for breaking it down for me, you've been a big help!

#10 Edited by Syncotic (52 posts) -

DRAGONS DOGMA - ALL THE WAY

#11 Posted by CTR360 (6851 posts) -

amalur by far

#12 Edited by Old_Gooseberry (3468 posts) -

I just started playing Kingdoms of Amular, and its surprisingly good so far. I like its action combat a lot more then other games like the Witcher 2. Its storyline isnt great or memorable but is good enough for an rpg like this. This game seemed to get some unfair negative reviews, its pretty good fun. Only negative parts are some quests are mmoish like fetch quests or kill this or that. But there is fast travel in this game so that can help reduce time wasted travelling back and forth to spots you've already been. Theres lots of decisions you can make sometimes and either let people live or die, i like that.

#13 Edited by yngsten (182 posts) -

@syncotic: That game was awesome! I'm ready for a new one!

#14 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18055 posts) -

Two Worlds 2 for me. That game is brilliant. Amalur is basically an offline MMO, it was tedious for me to get through, though I guess someone who likes MMOs would enjoy it. In detail Pros and Cons, as requested:

Two Worlds 2:

PROS:

- Gigantic world filled to the brim with long, interesting quests, almost on par with any Elder Scrolls

- Excellent side plots

- Fun, versatile battle system allowing you to switch between 3 loadouts on the fly to tackle different enemies

- A ton of secrets

CONS:

- Lame main story

- A few noticeable bugs, even a couple game breaking ones

- Awful final boss

Kindoms of Amalur:

PROS:

- Beatiful art design

- Lots of (fetch) quests, granting at least quantity if not quality

- Many ways to mix and shape your character's skillset

CONS:

- Incredibly easy, with overpowered magic making everything else pointless

- Uninteresting cliché lore and story

- Quests are nothing but a streak of excuses to get loot, no depth to them at all

#15 Edited by Blueresident87 (5195 posts) -

I've had more fun with Two Worlds II