Dawn of Fantasy: Kingdom Wars

 PC
User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 91 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 67 out of 91
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 91
  3. Negative: 18 out of 91

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. steamvox
    Apr 22, 2013
    6
    game was a joke on release what the hell were they thinking releasing in that state
    massive improvements since then still plenty of bugs and issues but the major 1s gone
    well worth a look now
    no depth or longevity to the game but for the price on steam its worth a few wks play
  2. Aelius
    Apr 4, 2013
    5
    Now you've read your fair share of obvious positively biased opinions, would you like to read a more scaled down one? Well here goes.

    If you liked the graphics of the old Age of empires and still yearn for those days, then this game will take you back. But if you yearn for similar game-play to your favorite RTS's, well... Not so much. Basic city building is there however your choice    Now you've read your fair share of obvious positively biased opinions, would you like to read a more scaled down one? Well here goes.

    If you liked the graphics of the old Age of empires and still yearn for those days, then this game will take you back. But if you yearn for similar game-play to your favorite RTS's, well... Not so much.

    Basic city building is there however your choice of placing the buildings is extremely limit to allocated spaces. The game can get very confusing and has a steep learning curve. Mostly because the missions aren't very well explained and the controls are clunky and confusing. On the plus side, the community for this game seems to be quite nice. If you have an issue, just ask someone on the in game chat for help and they'll usually answer you.

    As I previously noted, the graphics look very dated and the animations along with it. It's not that it's an ugly game, or that graphics means so much to me, but if you're going to go "retro" at least keep the glitches out of sight and put more detail in so I can tell the men apart without having to click on them.

    The building time of many buildings can be on average of over an Hour to build. Yes, a real life HOUR to build a building. Not happy with that? That's ok, you can speed it up with crowns, the games currency (besides gold). You can spend crowns on upgrades for your men and other various necessities. Other resources are on the map to be mined (gold, stone, wood, food), but also take literally ages to get your peasants to harvest enough of it.

    How do you get these crowns? You get them by completing missions or going to war with other people. You can also trade gold for crowns at a ridiculous price or actually buy them with real money. (Cash cow? moo)

    If you can look past that then never fear, your men are ready to follow you in to battle! All clumped up and lost. If you like mashing your mouse-buttons a lot, you'll love ordering your men about as they walk off on their own to get slaughtered and fumble about in unrecognisable blobs. Basically some simplistic combat strategy elements, nothing new or exciting.

    RTS games can be slow. I know this, and I love turtling and building up my armies and city, but this game is so slow, it's like watching a turtle who's been glued to the floor.

    Over-all the game isn't a bad game. It's just unpolished, looks old and feels slow. If you have the patience, then take the good critique from other people posts and the bad you've heard from me and I hope you'll be able to make up your mind.

    If you're still interested, I'd wait for a large price drop. Even more than the current one. And don't be fooled by all the great scores. The community is very protective of this game and are very reluctant to tell you of its shortcomings.

    Good luck.    … Expand
  3. BrewskiBruce
    Apr 4, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have played for 48 hours. These are my initial thoughts. -----

    Graphics Outdated to say the least. I'd say 2002 at it's best. Graphics for me do not make or break a game though as I can sit down and fire up older games such as AoE2, or AoM, and still have fun. Some of the camera movements are rather irritating after awhile. -----

    Sound/Music Initially was alright, but after awhile I turned it down to almost nothing. Just enough so I could barely hear it. -----

    General Gameplay Reminds me a bit of a mix between Stronghold, Total War, and Kingdoms of Camelot on Facebook. You can build a city yes, but the "plots" for buildings are already planned out so it's a matter of just picking where you want things to go. As far as gathering resources, it's the normal send the peasants to work, and delegate what you want them to gather. Which is fine for me. Unit controls for the army are decent, and it seems there is actually strategy to which units are used where. Not a game to pump one unit and mass raid, or so it doesn't seem that way. Sometimes troop movement is a bit flaky I've noticed when being sieged some of my units didn't respond right away, and I think that was a lag factor. I also noticed while initially being sieged the game responded with a lot of lag when troops were first moving, and smoothed out after about 5-10 seconds. At first the questing system seemed a bit confusing, but after taking a couple looks at the map and the quest log I could easily figure it out. This isn't rocket science. -----

    PVP/Co-op As of now pvp is limited to 1vs1 sieging as I understand. I've asked, and read that there are later plans to implement 2vs2, 3vs3 possibly to allow players to siege together. Also Co-op from what i'm reading is limited to 2 players sieging 1 NPC town, so currently you can play with a friend. -----

    Pay 2 Win? Not that I can see. You need crowns to do some research, and for upgrades for buildings which you can gain by doing quests, buying with gold in game, or simply buying out of game. From what I can tell if a player wanted to "Pay 2 Win", they would have to sink an awful lot of money into the game for crowns. Which I know there are people out there that would do this. There always is. Yet sieging, controlling troop movements, and knowing your troops does take skill. So that person who drops $200 to get ahead could also lose out a lot. -----

    Overall This game has a lot of potential in the long run. Patches have been released recently to fix things, and I see that being a regular thing as of now. Although I don't see this as a completed game for the market. If anything I would consider it in late beta for what it's trying to achieve. If your looking for a long term RTS, and like elements of stronghold, total war, and kingdoms of camelot then this game might be for you. Just be prepared for some bugs right now.    … Expand
  4. Wirly
    Apr 9, 2013
    7
    It's a great concept, and should have many great improvements in the future, but as it stands, it's a very buggy, not finished game. Many crashes occur, causing rollbacks of your progress. The graphics are very dated to be selling this game for $20, not to mention the very buggy AI path, and unfriendly interface.

    The main thing that bugs me, is the fact that this game IS a pay to win.    It's a great concept, and should have many great improvements in the future, but as it stands, it's a very buggy, not finished game. Many crashes occur, causing rollbacks of your progress. The graphics are very dated to be selling this game for $20, not to mention the very buggy AI path, and unfriendly interface.

    The main thing that bugs me, is the fact that this game IS a pay to win. An in-game market allows people to spend their crowns (Earned from achivs. or PvP) but, you can also pay an additional $5-10 on your already $20 game. So, going against players who have bought crowns, and spammed the special units you can buy there, is next to impossible. Plus, to advance, and upgrade you city, you need to spend additional crowns. Overall, I'm not impressed.    … Expand