Restricted Area (2005)

 PC
User Score
6.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 19 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 19
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 19
  3. Negative: 5 out of 19
Buy Now
Buy on

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. JamieS.
    Jun 3, 2005
    5
    It's a diablo clone - produced a decade after the games industry has moved onto bigger and better things. Even the original Diablo would seem dated these days - and this isn't as good! Diablo's graphics were smooth and fluid. This is jittery and unconvincing. Set in the future, in the first mission you come across ... half naked giants armed with hammers? What the ??? Maybe It's a diablo clone - produced a decade after the games industry has moved onto bigger and better things. Even the original Diablo would seem dated these days - and this isn't as good! Diablo's graphics were smooth and fluid. This is jittery and unconvincing. Set in the future, in the first mission you come across ... half naked giants armed with hammers? What the ??? Maybe they couldn't decide what era they wanted it to be. Everything seems to give off a second-rate feel, from the dated graphics, animations and sound effects to the menus. (In the graphics options, there is a column labeled "32" It has two sub-options: 16 and "framerate". What are they supposed to mean? As a moderately technically literate person, i figured out that they meant "16 bit colour depth" and "display framerate". But there appears to be no way to select 32 bit colour depth - so why do you even NEED a 16 bit option? An example of the confused design and general thoughtlessness) I have already removed this turkey from my hard drive. Bo-ring.… Expand
  2. RandoW.
    Jun 30, 2005
    3
    This game was really disapointing. From the 70% rating that I saw everywhere I took the 30 bucks price as apropriate. But it's not. The randomly generated levels and missions are as repetitive as they could be - the gameplay is ultimately boring. Even though there are 4 characters to chose from, with a set of different weapons, you'll end up playing the same style for 10 hours. This game was really disapointing. From the 70% rating that I saw everywhere I took the 30 bucks price as apropriate. But it's not. The randomly generated levels and missions are as repetitive as they could be - the gameplay is ultimately boring. Even though there are 4 characters to chose from, with a set of different weapons, you'll end up playing the same style for 10 hours. No tactics, no challenges. If you want to play a successor to Diablo II, get Sacred. If you want Fallout in realtime, get Fallout Tactics. This one is a waste of time and money.… Expand
  3. LuisV.
    Jul 22, 2005
    7
    Diablo model, that is cool. Graphics are not great but do the work. Cool sound. Very fun to play. Just try it.
  4. William
    Mar 13, 2006
    1
    AWFUL. CRAP. GARBAGE. Anyone who rates this over 5 works for marketing for this company. Do not waste your time, let alone your money or you'll end up with carpel tunnel from click click click click click non stop. There's a poor excuse for a plot, and no matter what you say to NPC's, they all react the same. The game is disgustingly linear. Two plus's, the graphicsAWFUL. CRAP. GARBAGE. Anyone who rates this over 5 works for marketing for this company. Do not waste your time, let alone your money or you'll end up with carpel tunnel from click click click click click non stop. There's a poor excuse for a plot, and no matter what you say to NPC's, they all react the same. The game is disgustingly linear. Two plus's, the graphics and the sound. Huge negatives - the gameplay stinks, the control is garbage, the AI is nonexistent and your character gets stuck.… Expand
  5. RayL.
    Oct 17, 2005
    10
    This is the *BEST* action-RPG ever - I have no idea what some of the reviews talk about. The graphics are FANTASTIC and the gameplay is actually better than Diablo 2!!
  6. JamesB.
    Oct 17, 2005
    10
    I simply love it! Cyberpunk meets Diablo 2 - one word: GREAT!
  7. JamesS.
    May 23, 2005
    10
    This game is really awsome! It´s the first action-RPG since Diablo 2 that is really fun to play.
  8. El_Guap0
    Sep 14, 2011
    2
    This game has a lot of promise, but falls short on a couple of issues. It's awfully repetitive and the worst voice acting I've ever heard. But you just might enjoy the Diablo-in-a-future-setting gameplay... for a while.
  9. storygamer
    Sep 15, 2020
    6
    At first, Restricted Area looks like a wild mix between Fallout, Deus Ex and Diablo. But while these mentions are video game classics, Restricted Area always stays mediocre. That´s sad, because this game had so much potential to satisfy the Diablo RPG nostalgia. Only for real hardcore genre fans edible.

Awards & Rankings

96
#96 Most Discussed PC Game of 2005

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
51

Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 24
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 24
  3. Negative: 10 out of 24
  1. GameSpot
    67
    It's a fairly simple and repetitive action RPG experience that's rough around the edges, yet it's not without a certain homegrown charm that should appeal to fans of the genre who don't expect too much.
    Read full review
  2. Gaming Age
    50
    While Restricted Area has some bright spots in terms of innovated ideas, you just can’t help but get that old, been there done that feeling while you are playing. The lack of any real plot will not help matters much more.
    Read full review
  3. Game Over Online
    71
    The game is simple and easy to play, the campaign is short (maybe 10-15 hours) but you can play it multiple times, and developing characters is fun. But the game is also a little sloppy.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »