War of the Roses

 PC
User Score
5.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 282 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 116 out of 282
  2. Mixed: 64 out of 282
  3. Negative: 102 out of 282

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. dc42
    Jan 6, 2013
    4
    This game shows promise but fails horribly. The melee combat is almost completely broken. Most of the time you get someone attacking you over and over with the same basic attack and can randomly kill you even if you have a shield. So very little skill is involved in this game. Other players say you need skill but don't listen to them. Very little skill is really needed since there is noThis game shows promise but fails horribly. The melee combat is almost completely broken. Most of the time you get someone attacking you over and over with the same basic attack and can randomly kill you even if you have a shield. So very little skill is involved in this game. Other players say you need skill but don't listen to them. Very little skill is really needed since there is no stamina or negative draw back from spam attacking someone. Since the game is meant to be a melee combat game, having it so broken seems like a total failure on behalf of the developer. However, the graphics are good. Gore is alright. If you need gore to sell you a game you should probably get your head examined anyway. Archery is pretty fun and always great feeling getting a headshot. Maps are decent but only a few are actually fun. Overall, pass on this title. Don't bother wasting your money. Although there is fun aspects to the game, most of the time you'll be pulling your hair out when your spam attacked or when you hit an opponent but it fails to register. However, if the developer fixes the basic mistakes they made then this title might be worth checking out. But in it's current state, don't bother.… Expand
  2. grainger
    Oct 3, 2012
    4
    I really wanted to like this game. It looks pretty good, but the fighting feels and looks very awkward. Its not very immersive, and its presentation is very arcadey. The hud is overwhelming, the VO is uninspired- it just feels very generic. The game modes are not exciting and there isn't much to inspire teamwork. The commander spawn in system is awful- you will be in a duel with a guy forI really wanted to like this game. It looks pretty good, but the fighting feels and looks very awkward. Its not very immersive, and its presentation is very arcadey. The hud is overwhelming, the VO is uninspired- it just feels very generic. The game modes are not exciting and there isn't much to inspire teamwork. The commander spawn in system is awful- you will be in a duel with a guy for a minute and suddenly 3 people blink into existence behind him and kill you. Players who want a melee grindfest and playing dress-up with knights might enjoy it but I don't see it having much long lasting appeal for many.… Expand
  3. Shadirrasda
    Oct 6, 2012
    4
    This game is absulutely amazing , the combat , atmosphere graphics , they nailed pretty much all of it.
    The real question is , is this game worth
  4. Blacklyche
    Oct 15, 2012
    4
    I have to say this is a huge disappointment. The concept is great ! The execution is only average but what really lets this down is the lack of content. Delivering this as an online only experience with no single player worth talking about fails to justify the price tag. In fact there are free games with more distance in them that this poor excuse.
    The possibilities were endless and more    I have to say this is a huge disappointment. The concept is great ! The execution is only average but what really lets this down is the lack of content. Delivering this as an online only experience with no single player worth talking about fails to justify the price tag. In fact there are free games with more distance in them that this poor excuse.
    The possibilities were endless and more development time, game design would have work wonders.
    A terrible shame.    … Expand
  5. HamSpanker
    Jan 5, 2013
    4
    War of the Roses on paper looks very interesting, and very polished. The truth is a whole other story. When you get into the game you will however start to realize this is not the perfect medieval game you wanted. The game lets you level up, and give you gold so you can unlock newa armor and better weapons and such. This means that you will in the first couple of levels (where you areWar of the Roses on paper looks very interesting, and very polished. The truth is a whole other story. When you get into the game you will however start to realize this is not the perfect medieval game you wanted. The game lets you level up, and give you gold so you can unlock newa armor and better weapons and such. This means that you will in the first couple of levels (where you are forced to used their default classes, since you cannot create your own) you will get slaughtered by higher leveled people. Sure skill is somewhat part of the game. Until some huge knight with a two handed sword comes running with full plate armor. I have trying almost everything, and I am not exaggerating, to bring a person in full plate down. I even had a friend of mine just stand still while I began to chop at him, and there was only one place he could get harmed. We then duelled and my friend just kept blocking that spot so I couldn't even hurt him.
    The good: good graphics, polished. The bad: Higher leveled people have access to better weapons, armor, etc. Most of the time people will just form a huge mass in middle of map, lack of game modes.

    Buy mount and blade instead it's cheaper and way more fun.    … Expand
  6. Dalario
    Jul 17, 2013
    4
    First of all, let me start by saying that I have been following the Mount & Blade saga since the first beta. I was hooked immediately.

    With that said, I hate this game. Mount & Blade is a great game. It has great gameplay and some very solid gameplay mechanics. I will even say that the combat and movement are fluid. War of the Roses is all but that. The feel of the old M&B games    First of all, let me start by saying that I have been following the Mount & Blade saga since the first beta. I was hooked immediately.

    With that said, I hate this game.

    Mount & Blade is a great game. It has great gameplay and some very solid gameplay mechanics. I will even say that the combat and movement are fluid.

    War of the Roses is all but that. The feel of the old M&B games is gone and replaced by a slow and clunky game experience.

    There is no single player campaign at all (which is to be expected and doesn't come as a surprise).

    The multiplayer is very niche and hardcore. You know how some servers in the original M&B had some bad mods that allowed you to have money? You remember how you hated it? Well, War of the Roses is a standalone version of those servers.

    This is not a game for the M&B fans. (Check out that other game instead.)    … Expand
  7. etb444
    Jan 24, 2014
    4
    This game is a multiplayer only, medieval third person action game set in 15th century England. For many of you, if you see this game on steam, this might look quite appealing. Unfortunately it is a huge waste of 10 GB and the graphics are fuzzy and not as I would have hoped. The actual playing is decent, but the frame rate goes at a dismal 10-40 FPS. It is really impossible to play unlessThis game is a multiplayer only, medieval third person action game set in 15th century England. For many of you, if you see this game on steam, this might look quite appealing. Unfortunately it is a huge waste of 10 GB and the graphics are fuzzy and not as I would have hoped. The actual playing is decent, but the frame rate goes at a dismal 10-40 FPS. It is really impossible to play unless you have patience. Anyway, save the 10 GB, don't get this game. Plus this game is infested with horrible bugs… Expand
  8. ethanvenzin
    May 7, 2014
    4
    This game sucks,it forces you to buy the full game and the gameplay is soo stiff and slow
    This is a bad game just don't get this game if you don't want to buy it just get chivalry or something else
  9. cylian3
    Jul 7, 2014
    4
    A very solid medieval brawler that unfortunately gets bulldozered by pay-2-win elements (real money for in-game gold), constant and game-breaking design choices (handgonnes, 99% armor penetration on blunt weapons, fire arrows, faceroll halberds). I could bring up on how the game fights any and all kinds of modding or how they're dilluting the game into the call of duty mindset but thatA very solid medieval brawler that unfortunately gets bulldozered by pay-2-win elements (real money for in-game gold), constant and game-breaking design choices (handgonnes, 99% armor penetration on blunt weapons, fire arrows, faceroll halberds). I could bring up on how the game fights any and all kinds of modding or how they're dilluting the game into the call of duty mindset but that would just be beating a dead horse at this point.… Expand
  10. CaptainMushroom
    Jul 13, 2014
    3
    Horrible game. A lack of goals, tactics and fun. Its just a big hack and slash chaos, and, if you were wondering, nothing like Mount and Blade. Don't waste harddisk space for this!
  11. Limbo9
    Oct 4, 2012
    3
    I can only speak for the Multiplayer. And i try to keep it short:

    Call of Duty with swords. anyone who confused this, with a sequel to the amazing Mount&Blade franchise, you are mistaken. The gameplay seems random and stiff. There is no first person, which makes it even more arcadelooking. I was really disappointed, and i wonder why i should play this, and not switch to the more than    I can only speak for the Multiplayer. And i try to keep it short:

    Call of Duty with swords. anyone who confused this, with a sequel to the amazing Mount&Blade franchise, you are mistaken. The gameplay seems random and stiff. There is no first person, which makes it even more arcadelooking. I was really disappointed, and i wonder why i should play this, and not switch to the more than capable competition. Chivalery i think it is called.    … Expand
  12. Tyrx
    Oct 3, 2012
    3
    I could see how this game might appeal to any newbies of the genre but the facts stand that FatShark have managed to butcher what could have been an awesome game in an awful attempt to make the game appeal to the masses. The funny thing about this is that even my "casual" friends can see through the terrible gimmicks and truly retarded choices that the developers have made in accordance toI could see how this game might appeal to any newbies of the genre but the facts stand that FatShark have managed to butcher what could have been an awesome game in an awful attempt to make the game appeal to the masses. The funny thing about this is that even my "casual" friends can see through the terrible gimmicks and truly retarded choices that the developers have made in accordance to the game.

    Let's break the negative and positives points of this game down; NEGATIVE: 1. **** progression system designed to hide the bland gameplay and increase the eventual short lifespan of the game. (summer flick) 2. Slow and cumbersome combat system. Two veterans will literally duel each other for upwards of 10 minutes simply because there's a very low "skill height level" compared to that of other games in the genre such as Mount & Blade.
    3. Developer is rejecting the fundamental aspects that make up PC gaming - they're refusing to post in topics asking them to release dedicated server files (even unranked files) and the devs have no plan to include mod support
    4. To rub the soreness of the lack of dedicated server files in further, the developers have decided to team up with Multiplay (Whom host **** servers, the only reason they're "big" is because they spend tonnes on marketing) to provide EXCLUSIVE server hosting. So the only way you can run a server is if you rent it. 5. Squad spawning system is so bad that I simply don't know how to sum it up in words. They might work in games such as Call Of Duty and Battlefield but THEY DON'T WORK IN THIS GENRE! 6. Game is riddled with bugs and connectivity issues, despite players warning FatShark that this was going to happen in alpha/beta.
    7. I could keep on talking about the negative aspects but why rehash content which you can find all over the 'net. The only positive aspects about this game is the graphics and excellent archer mechanics. Bascially, this game is simply an arcade game which should be priced around the $10 mark as it's really only good for wasting an hour or two on when you're completely bored. I might be being overly harsh with my review score, but FatShark have broken so many promises with this game that it's astounding that people are still defending them. I don't have any hopes for much after-release support considering FatShark's has a reputation (or lack thefore) for not creating updates for their products after launch.    … Expand
  13. honestmou5e
    Oct 8, 2012
    3
    A great idea hindered by poor execution all across the board. Not only is the gameplay on a whole relatively shallow, it is also one of the most unbalanced games I have ever played. Save yourself the money, for similar yet better titles look towards the Mount and Blade Titles and steer clear of this title.
  14. Badgameplayer
    Nov 30, 2012
    3
    This game is horrible, it says that it was made by the makers of mount and blade, but thats just a lie. They took the mount and blade combat system and violated it, worse than you can imagine. The game tries to appeal to the masses with its "customization" but all that leads to is the perks getting in the way of actual game play. The spammers are also unstoppable, the swords areThis game is horrible, it says that it was made by the makers of mount and blade, but thats just a lie. They took the mount and blade combat system and violated it, worse than you can imagine. The game tries to appeal to the masses with its "customization" but all that leads to is the perks getting in the way of actual game play. The spammers are also unstoppable, the swords are overpowered and everything else either wont penetrate armor or has the worst hit detection. And for the execution system, its dull and annoying to watch in a first person view someone do a stale execution on you, its aggravating and gets in the way of gameplay. The game is full of lag, has a poor development team which just fix's one or two things every month, and occasionally gives a few of the same weapons out. The graphics are the only redeeming thing about this game, besides that, the game has 0 love or actual effort put into it.… Expand
  15. Ridder
    Mar 5, 2013
    3
    This game actually sucks. Horrible combat system, max 30 fps on quite modern computer, graphic glitches in the main menu. The only plus of this game is graphics it looks quite good. But, seriously that's nearly not enough.
  16. Brosman
    Jun 24, 2013
    3
    Combat is incredibly clunky and slow, and victory one on one is always, ALWAYS given to the player with the higher level. I'm a level one obviously since i just bought the game, and you cant even penetrate level 30 players armor to do any damage. Its usually turns into one team running around a spawn slaughtering players without any fear of being injured. Out of the 6 games i played i onlyCombat is incredibly clunky and slow, and victory one on one is always, ALWAYS given to the player with the higher level. I'm a level one obviously since i just bought the game, and you cant even penetrate level 30 players armor to do any damage. Its usually turns into one team running around a spawn slaughtering players without any fear of being injured. Out of the 6 games i played i only enjoyed one as everyone in that game was an equal level (1-5) I cant recommend this game to anyone except people who have been their since day one and are higher levels, which is a pretty worthless recommendation. Fun when it works, but it hardly ever does.… Expand
  17. SkiiggeBoy
    Sep 18, 2013
    3
    This game is a wasted potential. It looks fun at first, but the more you play the more you become aware of its issues. The biggest flaw with this game is weapon balance. There is a huge variety of weapons yet you're limited to 3 main weapons and 2-3 sidearms. Even the community is getting angry at devs not being willing to reduce strength of certain weapons that dominate the game. ThoseThis game is a wasted potential. It looks fun at first, but the more you play the more you become aware of its issues. The biggest flaw with this game is weapon balance. There is a huge variety of weapons yet you're limited to 3 main weapons and 2-3 sidearms. Even the community is getting angry at devs not being willing to reduce strength of certain weapons that dominate the game. Those weapons either are both fast and strong or just have broken hitbox that you can't really avoid, since you will get hit by part of the weapon that's invisible.
    Melee combat is never trying to properly punish people who spam their attacks since the weapon's speed will always put you back in advantage over enemy, even if you get hit, so perhaps if you block once or twice that's enough. Feinting doesn't help either since your enemy will ignore it and just spam attacks mindlessly.
    One of the specially annoying things are shield bashes that stun you for a brief moment so the enemy always gets a hit on you, but that wouldn't be that bad if it wasn't for the fact you can do that all the time without any sort of cool down. The only way you can counter it is if you're out of enemy's reach, but then if he notices that, he can do 180 degree turn and slide away from you.

    Arrows are broken in this game as well. 1 arrow type becomes part of metagame due to its versatility. In the past that was swallow tail, which would penetrate every type of armor without any problem. That makes me wonder what armor piercing arrows are meant for. If you take certain type of arrows they should excel in the combat aspect they are meant for and lack in other aspects. That was meant to be fixed in latest patch, but it just made the early mentioned type of arrows replaced by a new one that does almost exact same thing.

    Game is lacking in game modes. Mostly it's team deathmatch or conquest (along with those there are assault and pitched battle that are almost never played). Team deathmatch is mindless killing without any tactics. Conquest is slightly better, but the fact the teams have to advance one flag at the time is really stupid. You end up fighting for the flag in the middle so there's barely any flanking or anything since enemy knows where to expect you. Lets also not forget about the fact that devs don't want to include duel mode, while duels are actually quite enjoyable.

    Reviving and execution mechanic is pretty irritating and while you could say you can avoid it and not suffer irritation, you will always need money as a beginner and that's the biggest income of gold for you. When you get good at the game you can avoid that and get just as much gold as the newbies who stop to revive or execute. I don't really see any other reason to revive teammate or execute enemy since you risk your life by doing so and it's not even properly rewarded.

    Oh, yes. I almost forgot to mention that the game has almost no protection against cheaters, so you will run into many people who will be speedhacking and some of them will be very subtle about it. The only way to deal with it is to make sure that the person is a cheater and vote kick him. However just getting his ID to kick him and write it all down is a painful process, so most of the time you will be like, "Ahh, it!" and will leave the match.

    Only positive thing I can think of is that devs release new content in their patches instead of making it a DLC. However game has a system where you buy coins with real money. Luckily most of the things are fairly cheap so you can obtain your imbalanced weapons just by playing 2-3 matches.

    Game could be fairly fun if it gets properly balanced, but since it's been so long without any proper balance update I'm afraid it will stay like this.

    Buy only if discounted and if you're okay with spending some money for a couple of hours of fun.    … Expand
  18. fandango89
    Oct 2, 2012
    2
    The idea of this game is great but not executed very well. Although they say it takes skill and to some degree it does, most of the time it doesn't. All it boils down to is a bunch of people fighting in a concealed area. That leads to most of the time you die it is because you got gangbanged 3 on 1. About 1 in every 4 fights is an even match and comes down to skill. There is no way toThe idea of this game is great but not executed very well. Although they say it takes skill and to some degree it does, most of the time it doesn't. All it boils down to is a bunch of people fighting in a concealed area. That leads to most of the time you die it is because you got gangbanged 3 on 1. About 1 in every 4 fights is an even match and comes down to skill. There is no way to sprint or way to get away so you always lose if ganged up on. The swinging mechanic is original but poorly performed. You have to move your mouse in the way you want to swing, but most of the time I would move it forward and it would swing left. You barely every swing where you want to. Also if you fight a higher level guy you automatically die if he is heavily armored. That is because he can only be hurt in the face and you can be hit anywhere and be hurt. With the attack system and the fact that the only way to hurt him is a jab to the face you can do nothing but die. The single player is just a few random battles to get you practicing but it literally explains nothing about fighting, game controls, or any tips to play. Also you are usually left to try and take points by yourself as your team AI doesn't know how to follow you. Most of the points you have to attack have multiple enemies and some respawn, which means you have to keep killing them as they all gang up and then respawn. I quit it after 15 minutes. A good idea but most of the execution and gameplay falls very short of the lofty aspirations. Apparently you have to play mount and blade games prior to playing this to appreciate it. I was super excited and then completely let down.… Expand
  19. BubbsTubbs
    Oct 4, 2012
    2
    The game is simplistic and worn out from the moment you first turn it on. Bottom line: something I wont be playing a few days from now. Granted its $30, but not worth even that.
  20. Vistance
    Sep 7, 2013
    2
    I played Chivalry before this and found it fun, but buggy and not worth the price tag for what still felt like a mod. Fast forward to now, I decided to try War of the Roses what a mistake. This game is full of people who have spent far too much time unlocking skins and weapon upgrades so you basically have no chance. Most of the players in the game kill you no matter what you do. I'veI played Chivalry before this and found it fun, but buggy and not worth the price tag for what still felt like a mod. Fast forward to now, I decided to try War of the Roses what a mistake. This game is full of people who have spent far too much time unlocking skins and weapon upgrades so you basically have no chance. Most of the players in the game kill you no matter what you do. I've tried all the tactics, faking attacks, parrying enemy attacks, it's just so badly done. The hitboxes are small and random, so you can't reliably hit someone just because your mace or sword just hit them. The third person perspective sucks for immersion and makes it hard to aim given the game has such small hitboxes. I unlocked plate armor and thought I'd try it assuming I'd be much harder to kill NOPE. Plate armor is useless, the latest patch must have rebalanced because people fussed about plate armor being OP. Now I get murdered by guys with swords and axes with my visor down. Somehow slashing a guy in plate armor just murders him.

    The realism in this game is just totally missing. No stamina, so that means everyone just spams attacks. There's no real different feel between the armor types they just look different. Honestly this game makes me think of Call of Duty far more than Chivalry did. This has ranks, crests which are like the banner thing in CoD (I have no idea what it's called anymore), ridiculous things that look stupid (Big antlers on a guy's head, really authentic there), and ridiculous skins for some of the armors and unlockable weapons. Chivalry had unlockable weapons, but at least required a player to be really good with them to get the better ones and didn't have terrible ones for starter weapons. It's hard to believe the same people who made Mount & Blade made this abomination, as M&B is a good and fun game. This is nothing like it. Avoid at all costs. Any small redeeming factors in this game get totally overshadowed by terrible balance, ridiculous learning curve, and it just feels too arcade to me.    … Expand
  21. Chirpe
    Sep 19, 2013
    2
    The game is massively unbalanced; One large example would be that the first class that is unlocked when you start the game does extremely minimal to no damage to two of the other classes. Once the other classes are unlocked the game basically becomes a "Who can insta-kill the other other first", which I personally don't find fun. The graphics are decent, but the game suffers from poorThe game is massively unbalanced; One large example would be that the first class that is unlocked when you start the game does extremely minimal to no damage to two of the other classes. Once the other classes are unlocked the game basically becomes a "Who can insta-kill the other other first", which I personally don't find fun. The graphics are decent, but the game suffers from poor optimization. Like any free game, if you think you might like the game try it out for yourself, but many will be disappointed in doing so.… Expand
  22. DroneIV
    Oct 2, 2012
    2
    I was looking forward to a single player but after launching the game, learned that there wasn't. disappointing... Still, I decided to jump into multiplayer. I played for about 15 minutes, I killed one or two guys. One guy I fought for maybe five minutes. We both had shields and were swinging - blocking - swinging again - blocking again. It wasn't the most thrilling thing in the world. ItI was looking forward to a single player but after launching the game, learned that there wasn't. disappointing... Still, I decided to jump into multiplayer. I played for about 15 minutes, I killed one or two guys. One guy I fought for maybe five minutes. We both had shields and were swinging - blocking - swinging again - blocking again. It wasn't the most thrilling thing in the world. It ended when I got killed by a guy running up behind me. After that 15 minutes, I lost connection to the server and my list of servers was gone. I give up on this game. The 15 minutes of gameplay I experienced was barely mediocre.… Expand
  23. Muuvinki
    Mar 2, 2013
    2
    Complete disgrace of medieval games, broken combat system, not even good tutorial to help you, this is probably the worst game experiences ive yet had. Buy Chivarly rather than this broken piece of garbage.
  24. DJC01
    Oct 13, 2012
    2
    Coming from a Huge fan of Mount and Blade Warband i thought this game would have a similiar type Style of playing. So i decided to give it a try and to my extreme disappointment This games battle fighting is not even up to mount and blades, it is reptative with a guy more often than not falling to the ground holding his stomach??? I'd say they need to go back and analyze the fighting fromComing from a Huge fan of Mount and Blade Warband i thought this game would have a similiar type Style of playing. So i decided to give it a try and to my extreme disappointment This games battle fighting is not even up to mount and blades, it is reptative with a guy more often than not falling to the ground holding his stomach??? I'd say they need to go back and analyze the fighting from mount and blade warband and give it a slight twist and go for a re-do as sadly this game in my opionion will be one of those fall by the wayside $9.99 titles that we see way to often already. Such a shame as it had the potential to be so much more :(… Expand
  25. LordSithis
    Oct 27, 2012
    2
    This game could have seriously used another year in development. Its buggy, bland environments, the combat is bland and quite unbalanced. There are a lot of different attack options, but you can simply horizontal swing spam your way into getting the most kills with a 2H sword.
  26. Beredan
    Oct 15, 2012
    2
    This game had some massive potential, when I saw the original trailer I was hooked. Unfortunately, I was incredibly disappointed when I finally got to play it. It seems that the majority of players play as heavily armored archers or heavily armored two-handed swordsmen. Since I was getting cut up by these swordsmen, I decided that as soon as I reached the required level I would buy theThis game had some massive potential, when I saw the original trailer I was hooked. Unfortunately, I was incredibly disappointed when I finally got to play it. It seems that the majority of players play as heavily armored archers or heavily armored two-handed swordsmen. Since I was getting cut up by these swordsmen, I decided that as soon as I reached the required level I would buy the plate armor and use a sword myself. It seemed to work, but the swordsmen were still cutting through my armor as if it were made of glass. I tried carrying a shield, this time they poked through my armor until I started bleeding. Tried using riposte to parry the blows so I could get a shot in, still no dice. No matter what I tried as an infantryman, I could not swing a sword as fast as these other players. My next bet was to try playing as an archer, pretty much the same thing happened except I seemed to be more of a target this time around. I feel that I gave the game a fair chance, already playing over 24 hours worth, maybe I'm just not good at it but there definitely needs to be a drawback on swinging a two-handed sword around wildly, otherwise you run through a gauntlet to find out who's got the sharpest blade then wait for the new players to swoop in and poke your eyes out with a dagger. Item wise, this game does not offer much. Everyone gets the same armors, the only customization available is color change. There's three bow choices, one two-handed sword choice, two dagger choices, and a couple of other one handed weapons and pole-arms. I know it's a multiplayer game, but some item variety would be nice, I don't expect over 100 different choices but I'd like to maintain some level of individuality.

    Crashes seem to happen to me a lot, mostly CTD. I've had instances where I would gain entry to a server, only to be met with just a background and no menu choices. In those cases, you'll be using ALT+Tab to get to the desktop and force close the game. I still feel like there's a lot of potential for War of the Roses, I think once some rebalancing and bug-fixing is done it will be more playable for me, but as of right now, I'm hanging up my sword.    … Expand
  27. matter_of_fact
    Mar 4, 2013
    2
    Nice graphics but awful gameplay and animations. Even though this was heavily discounted it still feels like a waste of money. Very much doubt I'll play again.
  28. jjmc00
    Jan 31, 2013
    2
    Hardly any servers up, only 32 player support (I haven't seen one 64 player game), coupled with shoddy controls and the most frustrating tutorial I've ever played, which is saying a lot. There is also NO single player content besides that awful tutorial, and there's only 7 maps with 2 game modes... I'm very glad I only bought it at paradox's half-price sale, because I truly regret buyingHardly any servers up, only 32 player support (I haven't seen one 64 player game), coupled with shoddy controls and the most frustrating tutorial I've ever played, which is saying a lot. There is also NO single player content besides that awful tutorial, and there's only 7 maps with 2 game modes... I'm very glad I only bought it at paradox's half-price sale, because I truly regret buying this game, it's a joke as far as I'm concerned… Expand
  29. Herkkutatti
    Apr 16, 2013
    2
    As a veteran M&B player i was really interested of this, The idea of this game is great but not executed very well. Combat is clumsy and not working good and smooth like on Mount and blade series, graphics are nice but it doesn't matter when the gameplay is horribly bad It always feel like it would run on 20 fps or lagging like on 150 ping.
  30. Sirik_Matak
    Oct 2, 2013
    2
    It looks beautiful, it sounds that way, too. Who doesn't want to swing a sword? Well, not in this game, because swords are actually peasant weapon here. Just farm through your pathetic free frag season, equip plate armour and warhammer/crossbow to even have a chance versus other plate+warhammer players. The melee combat is a mess, an absolute clusterf***, not explained and even if youIt looks beautiful, it sounds that way, too. Who doesn't want to swing a sword? Well, not in this game, because swords are actually peasant weapon here. Just farm through your pathetic free frag season, equip plate armour and warhammer/crossbow to even have a chance versus other plate+warhammer players. The melee combat is a mess, an absolute clusterf***, not explained and even if you finally know what's what, it simply doesn't work as it should. I guess that a clusterf*** defines a "refined" novadays, but don't get fooled there's not a single thing that's "refined" here.
    It's a good spamhammer simulator, though.    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

48
#48 Most Discussed PC Game of 2012

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
73

Mixed or average reviews - based on 28 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 28
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 28
  3. Negative: 0 out of 28
  1. PC PowerPlay
    Dec 2, 2012
    60
    The foundation for a sophisticated swordplayer is here, but War of the Roses misses the jugular by forgetting to include the rest. [Dec 2012, p.74]
  2. CD-Action
    Nov 29, 2012
    80
    An interesting medieval action game with a very good combat system (except for a rather primitive mounted combat) which is more refined than its counterpart in Chivalry: Medieval Warfare. [CD-Action 13/2012, p.62]
  3. Games.cz
    Nov 29, 2012
    70
    A complicated game mechanics title that's obviously suited for gamers in love with medieval battles. If it is your love, you will clench your teeth and the gameplay will reward you with a fantastic atmosphere and a rich experience. The game's variations are few, so it is basically two groups of fighters slitting each others throats. Nonetheless, expanding the gameplay experience is a likelihood.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »