The Age of Decadence

 PC
User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 242 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 180 out of 242
  2. Mixed: 22 out of 242
  3. Negative: 40 out of 242

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. marc5477
    May 7, 2017
    3
    1st of all, this is not Fallout. Anyone claiming it is, needs a sanity check. Fallout was engaging from minute 1, has a much more interesting story, better itemization, and most importantly, it was incredibly fun due to when it was released. It was innovative and fresh. It also had a much better combat system with more options and strategy (thanks to perks and skills). This is not1st of all, this is not Fallout. Anyone claiming it is, needs a sanity check. Fallout was engaging from minute 1, has a much more interesting story, better itemization, and most importantly, it was incredibly fun due to when it was released. It was innovative and fresh. It also had a much better combat system with more options and strategy (thanks to perks and skills). This is not Fallout... it is not Baldurs Gate, NWN or even Diablo.

    Three things kill this game.

    #1 Heavy Random number generator (RNG) combat dependency. It sucks. Period. All combat in the 1st town of the game put you at the mercy of the RNG. This is not fun. When you win it does not feel like you won due to strategy or skill. I know that many attribute this to old style gaming back when we had dice, but that was a limitation of the time (pre-video gaming and computers). Yes you can skip the fights, but if you do that you might as well not be playing a video game. Fighting and strategy in a fight is fun. Skipping them and giving us a paragraph explaining what happened is not fun. Okay so make a fighting character you say? Yes, and even if you do, you will lose a lot of fights due to bad luck hence you have to use a lot of cheese to win which is boring. I can take a character built just for fighting and he will still lose to some homeless near naked thugs if they roll lucky. This problem does start to go away once your character gains more skill points but it is not fun in the 1st 5 hours (or so) of the game.

    #2 The need to meta-game kills the immersion. The 1st play through is fine (if you simply dont think about meta-gaming) and makes you want to replay the game to see where alternative paths lead but in order to succeed at many quests and unlock paths you need knowledge that cannot be gained without meta-gaming and that is just boring and not fun at all. The game encourages the player to hoard skill points and quick save before every encounter and interaction to insure that they can pass some sort of skill check. If not, reload, allocate points, and continue. So basically, one second you cannot even spell the word actor (because you never allocated points to impersonation) and the next you are Marlon Brando because you allocated 40 points to the skill. Hence, destroys all immersion.

    #3 Its boring... characterization in this game is very very very weak. It reads like a history book and everyone just seems distant and... dead. There is not enough interpersonal dialog to make you care about your own character or any other character in the game. This makes the story a bit weak as well since I didnt care one way or another what happens.

    The game can be described as late 90s infinity engine throwback combined with older early 90s DnD games like Champions of Krynn. However where the infinity engine games shined was in story and character development and unfortunately, this game is very weak on that front.

    I enjoyed the fact that this game encourages the player to think deeply about their character build. Those skill points at creation really do matter as does your skill allocation. However this is no where near as deep as Neverwinter Nights. Also, this game becomes very linear once your allocations are made and there is little wiggle room throughout a play through to change or adjust. Most of the old classics gave you lots of room to customize but in this game once you start on a path there is no deviation or you will be severely handicapped. Again, this is not fun and makes the game feel much more linear than it really is. Your only other option is to do another play through which is not everyone's cup of tea. The greatest games of the infinity engine era did not require multiple replays to fully enjoy the game and since most had more than 1 controllable character, you were able to do most quests and solve most puzzles without having to do the whole game over again. In some ways, this game tries to be like Diablo but does not do a good job of it because it is not an itemization game and you cannot carry over your character to multiple games to improve on them.

    Despite my harsh criticisms of this game, I found myself actually enjoying the 1st run of the game but the RNG thing was a huge letdown in the 1st parts of the game. The meta-gaming flaws really didnt pop out until I tried to run through the game for the 2nd to n-th time and I realized it really is not that much fun to play more than once because I was just meta-gaming and cheesing my way through the game.

    The game is slightly below average. Since 5 is basically average on this site, I would say that this is far below average with the caveat that I see a lot of potential here. This game however is not my cup of tea.    … Expand
  2. Avey123Avey
    Mar 19, 2023
    4
    The game has some great ideas and an admirable amount of replay value. The execution however leaves a lot to be desired. The combat is mediocre, the writing and roleplay dialogue is mediocre and the presentation is just downright ugly. Still given how unique it is it's certain to attract certain types who really get on with this games design decisions since there's really no one elseThe game has some great ideas and an admirable amount of replay value. The execution however leaves a lot to be desired. The combat is mediocre, the writing and roleplay dialogue is mediocre and the presentation is just downright ugly. Still given how unique it is it's certain to attract certain types who really get on with this games design decisions since there's really no one else offering a better alternative.… Expand
  3. MR67
    Nov 30, 2018
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Age of Decadence has a somewhat interesting setting and storyline (if you can disregard the slightly cheesy faux-ancient Rome/sci fi setting) but sadly is let down by its antiquated graphics and punishingly difficult, frustrating gameplay. The developers seem to expect you to constantly die, reload from your last save and then use your newly acquired metagaming knowledge to get past whatever brought your game to a premature end the last time. You are generally encouraged to avoid combat as it almost always ends up being fatal for you, with your character either being outnumbered and/or up against enemies who are more powerful than you. The game mechanics do not allow you to flee once combat has started either. If you try and go the non-combat route, you generally have to make lots of checks against your various skills and in a lot of cases, a failed check can also be fatal. And just when you get to the point where you think you're doing well, voila.....a single failed skill check or another completely unfair combat you end up in.....and wham - game over.

    Some in-game examples:

    - I arrive at a remote village where the villagers throw me down a pit (after I failed a strength check to resist them). I successfully make a sneak check to avoid this robot which is patrolling below, and go down some stairs where I find some machinery I cannot do anything with, so the only option is to go back upstairs where the robot is. I then have to make another sneak check to lure it downstairs, which I then fail. I then get forced into combat with the robot who proceeds to wipe the floor with me. Game over.
    - Playing as a thief, I sneak into a room in an inn and try to pick the lock on a chest. I fail to spot a trap which instantly kills me. Game over.
    - On arriving at the second city in the game, my heavily armoured praetor character tries to save a merchant from 3 thugs who want to rob and kill him. I fail to convince them to go away so I get forced into combat with them. They are all better in combat than me and I inevitably end up getting surrounded by them and wiped out as there never seems to be a spot I can move to in order to have them come at me one at a time (and you can't flee combat once it starts). Game over.

    This, IMHO, is not good game design. I like to play CRPGs without having to reload from saved games when things go all pear-shaped as it feels like cheating. I can't recommend this game unlike you like to save-scum and metagame. The graphics also look like something out of a game from the early 2000s. On the plus side, the writing is decent (apart from all the somewhat out of place modern day vulgarities in some of the character dialogues) and there is a lot of replayability as the story varies depending on the class you play.    … Expand
  4. deadsanta
    Nov 2, 2015
    1
    One of the worst "RPG"s I've ever played. Incoherent, muddled and punitive. By that last one, I mean that the game doesn't actually reward you for learning how to play it over time, it just punishes you with failure in each new situation until you figure out the correct sequence to achieve a positive or non-fatal result. So it's an RPG only in the sense that you are free to fail any wayOne of the worst "RPG"s I've ever played. Incoherent, muddled and punitive. By that last one, I mean that the game doesn't actually reward you for learning how to play it over time, it just punishes you with failure in each new situation until you figure out the correct sequence to achieve a positive or non-fatal result. So it's an RPG only in the sense that you are free to fail any way you like until you find the one optimal solution that the devs have scripted.

    It reminds me of the old arcade game Dragon's Lair, where there were several moves you could make in a scene, but all of them but one lead to a colorful death.

    That's not "hardcore"-style, as the devs would have you believe, that's "Choose Your Own Adventure"-style.    … Expand
  5. Yosa
    Oct 15, 2015
    4
    This is a game that takes a more D&D approach to stats and skills and for that I applaud the developers vision as most RPGs have bloated stats systems and throw challenge at you in the form of monster hit points; that's where any praise ends.

    What I hate most about this game is that there are stat checks behind every major conversation option and in all quest related story elements; as    This is a game that takes a more D&D approach to stats and skills and for that I applaud the developers vision as most RPGs have bloated stats systems and throw challenge at you in the form of monster hit points; that's where any praise ends.

    What I hate most about this game is that there are stat checks behind every major conversation option and in all quest related story elements; as well as steep skill checks involved in everything very early in the game. This amounts to very frustrating and illogical game flow. The combat is flat out bad, everything will kill you as you are so far behind any curb that your best attacks will just miss most of the time against any single opponent let alone multiple ones, this is one aspect I should have appreciated but I cant stomach how irrelevant combat skills seem to hold up against the encounters in this game.

    I could go into the aesthetic and other game qualities but this game is more RPG than eye candy, in fact I could liken this to a choose your own adventure book with interactive graphics, content gated behind a plethora of stat/skill checks to the point of ridiculousness.    … Expand
  6. nnlocke
    Oct 29, 2015
    3
    TL;DR: Interesting idea, but poorly executed.

    Let me start by saying that I appreciate difficult games. I am very fond of true roguelikes, and restarting a game multiple times doesn't bother me, as long as I can expect a different experience each time. AoD does not deliver this. What we have here is a very linear progression, but with artificial limitations force by the extremely    TL;DR: Interesting idea, but poorly executed.

    Let me start by saying that I appreciate difficult games. I am very fond of true roguelikes, and restarting a game multiple times doesn't bother me, as long as I can expect a different experience each time.

    AoD does not deliver this. What we have here is a very linear progression, but with artificial limitations force by the extremely stringent stat and skill points. There may be multiple ways of accomplishing an objective, however the end result is essentially the same.

    This model essentially forces you to choose to be either a talker, or a fighter - hybrid builds are invariably fatally underpowered. Generally speaking, since you have less skills to spread your points as a fighter, it is easier to build a strong pure fighting character than it is a pure talker - there are several different types of persuasion mechanics as a talker, which are sometimes tested at the same time. You might be great at disguise, but if the check called for disguise AND trading, you're screwed.

    There are crafting abilities as well, however your points are spread thin enough as it is, and sinking points into crafting can set back your progress significantly.

    Note that the above are all gameplay complaints, but I'd like to talk for a moment about the graphics and interface. Now, I'm not normally a graphics whore, but this game looks...not good. At best, the graphics are 10 years behind current gen. I think they would have been better off with an isometric view (like Baldur's Gate) than trying for full 3D. Additionally, the controls are very wonky, and the screens extremely bare.

    The setting itself is intriguing, and is the basis for what points I did give this game. There are interesting aspects to the story, but some of it is never fully fleshed out, and what is there is vastly overshadowed by the poor overall design.

    If it's on sale, might be picking up as a curiosity, but prepare to become frustrated with the game design quickly. Posts on the AoD forums suggest using console commands to make your experience more tolerable, which is an obvious indicating that the game is poorly balanced - if your own forums contain suggestions on how to modify the game to make it better, you have failed at game design.    … Expand
  7. marcus113
    Oct 19, 2015
    1
    Wow his this over scored or what? Its yet another infinity engine throwback game but lets get real, it is a lite version of the old games and is not nearly as good. They try to make this game unique by making it restrictive (and calling that hard... it isnt) but that is not enough for me to make it enjoyable. It is missing the fun factor.
  8. VonLokotun
    Oct 26, 2015
    0
    I always liked games with turn-based combat. This game however is really the worst I played. I finished it in about 22 hours, one playthrough, and finished only to write this review. The combat is pretty boring. All you do is correctly spend your skill points before. And then click and try one of the things. I put all my points into fighting skills and was pretty much doing the standardI always liked games with turn-based combat. This game however is really the worst I played. I finished it in about 22 hours, one playthrough, and finished only to write this review. The combat is pretty boring. All you do is correctly spend your skill points before. And then click and try one of the things. I put all my points into fighting skills and was pretty much doing the standard attack all the time. I was hoping the lore and dialogs in the game would keep the game interesting for me, but it didn't. Each dialog or quest is supposedly handcrafted according to developer, so you really don't learn anything but just trying to guess what to click. Also, if failed a quest the best thing is to reload (and you reload a lot in this game) and forget about it. The ending is anti-climatic. Camera, controls, interface - all of this is so old and clunky. I am not a graphics whore but this is definitely too much. Hardcore games don't mean they are just hard. I prefer games that are easy to learn and hard to master. This one is hard to learn and hard to master. Play PoE, Underrail or Legends of Eisenwald - all these games are at least twice as fun compared to AoD.… Expand
  9. Thorkell
    Oct 25, 2015
    4
    Interesting at first look, it made me rage closer to the end. Loading single battle like 40 times is not fun! But you should do this because other few quests needs certain amount of rightly distributed skill points. Few mistakes in a distribution on early stages make the game nearly impassible. Nevertheless I managed to finish it and the end was absolutely boring.
  10. observer000
    Dec 21, 2015
    1
    Dull combat - you only control one char and can viably specialize in one weapon. I tried a full-combat merc, it got so boring I had to force myself through. There is almost no difficulty/complexity even on the highest setting once you've learned the ropes.

    Average writing. Walls and walls and walls of text: 101 on how *not* to write. Mock-Roman "lore" you don't care about (and neither    Dull combat - you only control one char and can viably specialize in one weapon. I tried a full-combat merc, it got so boring I had to force myself through. There is almost no difficulty/complexity even on the highest setting once you've learned the ropes.

    Average writing. Walls and walls and walls of text: 101 on how *not* to write. Mock-Roman "lore" you don't care about (and neither do the writers, considering they scrap it for sci-fi half-way). Despite posing as "grimdark" and "realistic" you get strangers talking their heads off to you at the slightest opportunity.

    Started off promising but ended up in a puff. Quite a waste of time but fun for the first 5-10 hours, probably not worth the price.    … Expand
  11. metacriticfasch
    Oct 31, 2015
    0
    The game is an absolute disaster.Ten years in development, it might take another 10 to make it enjoyable. They are trying to sell it as an RPG, but at best this can be classified as a visual novel. They also sell it as hard, but it not hard at all, you just have to play it exactly as the devs want you, or else.... A visit to the dentist is more enjoyable than playing this 'game'.
  12. Tomicsavo
    Feb 16, 2021
    2
    Well, unfortunately iI didn't like it at all. The controls are too annoying, the game is hard, it doesn’t support you at all, so it doesn’t make much sense to put more energy into it.
  13. themediocritic
    Feb 28, 2020
    4
    A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

    Score: 4/10 Mediocrity Score: Mediocre at Best. The Age of Decadence is a strangely unbalanced turn-based CRPG. It rather uniquely takes combat out from being the main focus and pits the player into a scenario where you can take different approaches. Touted for being a game where "choices matter", the game somehow feels so linear -    A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

    Score: 4/10

    Mediocrity Score: Mediocre at Best.

    The Age of Decadence is a strangely unbalanced turn-based CRPG. It rather uniquely takes combat out from being the main focus and pits the player into a scenario where you can take different approaches. Touted for being a game where "choices matter", the game somehow feels so linear - locking the player into a path chosen early on. Choices in the game will keep you on your toes, that is until you realize the pattern of don't trust anyone, ever. My advice before buying is - play the demo first.

    Tags: The few words that come to mind are: mediocre, unbalanced, dialogue-heavy, cheap.

    Quick Take: 
    Play the demo first. For the intention of being redundant for effect, if there is anything you should do before buying, it is to play the demo. This game is both very difficult and very easy. Rather unique in its approach, within The Age of Decadence you can 100% avoid all combat in the game by taking a more charismatic-stacked approach in your character build. What they don't mention is how incredibly simple the game becomes when you go for this non-combat route. It turns into a dialogue-heavy, point-and-click game where if you make the wrong choice you likely will be thrown into a combat situation where you will surely, and cheaply, die. Go with the combat route, and you are faced with a stacked-against-you RNG-based combat which is difficult to the point of coming off as both brutal and cheap. The one thing both routes have in common is the smoke-and-mirrors masking the cheap game-ending situations it constantly throws your way. In complete fairness reading reviews, watching let's plays, playing the demo, or even the reading developer's own disclaimers - potential players have been warned that "there is a good chance that you won’t like it, precisely because we took too many liberties with the established design". I can't help but feel like this is akin to being told "Here's the really over-cooked steak you ordered. There is a good chance you won't like it, but since this is all intentional - we've taken an extra heavy-handed approach with its blackened design." Yet here I am, disappointed that I paid for a really over-cooked steak that has an impressive char-broiled aesthetic.

    Pros:
    - Has an honest demo.
    - Multiple routes may be taken to beat the game.
    - Incredibly funny and useful skill/ability descriptions. More games should take inspiration from this.
    - Some hilarious ways to find yourself dying, made out as a fool, or being separated from your money.
    - Budget-friendly in cost and in required/recommended system specs. 
    - NPCs are hilariously evil, greedy, untrustworthy, and always out to get you. 

    Cons:
    - A lot of cheap situations made to make you fail while masquerading as being a "choices matter" feature.
    - RNG in combat is grossly stacked against the player, and always in favor of the NPC combatants. 
    - The non-combat path becomes a trivial point-and-click game that leads to instadeath anytime you find yourself having clicked the wrong dialogue choice and end-up in combat.
    - Boring story with a boring end-conclusion. Dialogue becomes a chore.
    - The most important choice you will pick are your attribute points at the start of the game. Once you set yourself on that path, there is no deviating from it. You are locked in and cannot improve your stats in the game. 
    - Complete exclusion of black or dark-skinned racial choices. I mention this as it does let you choose skin shades, but only of the white variety. Take this as you like. It doesn't affect gameplay, just something of note.
    - Lacking equipment options to suit your character with. I felt it was far too shallow.

    Concept: 
    Throwback to the days of the classic-RPG. A bit experimental in its choice to take the focus away from combat and places it on the decisions and paths you take within a brutally corrupt and greedy society. Strongly driven by narrative with a big emphasis on dialogue (over 600,000 words of dialogue alone). Name of the game is, survive or die. Expect the unexpected. Unless you're not expecting to die. You're gonna die. 

    Graphics: 
    Nothing award-winning for sure. Still seems dated for 2015-standards, and even more so for 2020. Keep your expectations reasonable, and it will be fine. Good enough so as not to detract from the gameplay.

    Sound:
    Stellar job. Great music and sounds are very fitting. Unfortunately for the rest of the game, for me, this might be its strongest aspect. No voice-acting though. 

    Entertainment: 
    Letting my guard down only to be tricked again by another shady commoner led to many
    enjoyable and funny moments. The frustration of too much dialogue, or frustration of one-sided combat, soiled the good times that I found elsewhere in the game. I had a hard time finding a point where I felt the game was balanced. It was either too easy or too hard. Call me Goldilocks.     … Expand
  14. F1_is_WWE
    Jun 8, 2023
    2
    You cannot play a good character in this game. The 4 guilds in this game are: thieves, assassins, usurers, and violent soldiers. You can technically ignore their quest lines, but if you do so then you will be severely under-leveled. And since this game is difficult, you need as many levels as possible.

    The combat is boring. What makes it worse is that it is always solo, you never    You cannot play a good character in this game. The 4 guilds in this game are: thieves, assassins, usurers, and violent soldiers. You can technically ignore their quest lines, but if you do so then you will be severely under-leveled. And since this game is difficult, you need as many levels as possible.

    The combat is boring. What makes it worse is that it is always solo, you never control a party. Fortunately you can ignore the combat completely, as almost all quests can be resolved by passing dialogue skill checks. Unfortunately, doing so de-facto turns the game into a visual novel. As other reviewers mentioned, because every quest can be solved either by combat or by skill checks, you are encouraged to dump all your level points into either combat skills or non combat skills. Splitting the points makes the game extremely difficult (read: save-scumming). But putting all your points into combat results in a boring whack-a-thon, putting all your points into dialogue results in a boring choose-your-own-adventure game.

    Still, a positive - there are many different routes to take, many different ways to solve quests. These choices do have some consequences. Choosing certain builds will lock you out of certain quests, will even lock you out of certain areas, so there is a lot of replyability.    … Expand

Awards & Rankings

52
#52 Best PC Game of 2015
55
#55 Most Discussed PC Game of 2015
76
#76 Most Shared PC Game of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 17 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 17
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 17
  3. Negative: 0 out of 17
  1. Brash Games
    Apr 14, 2016
    80
    The Age of Decadence is worth every penny.
    Read full review
  2. CD-Action
    Mar 30, 2016
    90
    A unique game for connoisseurs that still weep over Fallout’s fate. The Age of Decadence is minimalistic in terms of technology, but its depth in almost every gameplay aspect is astonishing. [03/2016, p.48]
  3. GameOver.gr
    Jan 29, 2016
    90
    One of the most well designed RPG’s of all time. Meaningful choices, authentic combat system, unique role playing experience, field for many distinctive playthroughs. See beyond its choppy graphics and enjoy this refined hidden role playing gem. Excellent.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »