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. Zalzany
    Mar 3, 2013
    9
    Alright first off, this is not a simple point and click game. And the Skill reference on the trailers is 100% true. If you got zero patience to learn how to fight, instead of blindly click well your better off not trying to play or review a game that tries to simulate combat. This game attempts to simulate the historical War of the Roses battles, so the weapons, armor, even the battleAlright first off, this is not a simple point and click game. And the Skill reference on the trailers is 100% true. If you got zero patience to learn how to fight, instead of blindly click well your better off not trying to play or review a game that tries to simulate combat. This game attempts to simulate the historical War of the Roses battles, so the weapons, armor, even the battle areas are hand picked out of history and get quite a bit of effort put in to feel as close to real as they can.

    That being said, this is not some mindless FPS even though it may get put into its category some times by people who don't know where to put it. Armor makes you move slow, sprinting in it will have you hunched over unable to put up a fight after a min of stop and go sprints. In this type of armor with these weapons you move at a general pace. These are meant to be soldiers, so they are expected to not simply fight for 20 mins and call it a day, these men are expected to be at the read 15 hours or more out of the day. That seems to be the biggest hurdle for players, the realization the weight of the armor. A modern chain shirt using much lighter steel can weigh over 50 lbs. The default armor is a chain shirt, a coif which is about 1/4 the weight, with leather sleeves/pants, and a breast plate that weighs quite a bit. There is a big reason this armor went out of fashion after a gun was invented. It was physically demanding, expensive to make, and restricted movement.

    I personally wore a bit of modern armor made out of a garage metal shop for competition fighting. This armor was lighter and actually weighed in competition to scale with the real stuff for point purposes. Fighting in it required moving slowly and adjusting everything, the simple act of swinging a sword with metal or chain armor on changes dramatically because of the weight and the restrictions it places on you.

    They don't just tamper with melee combat making armor slow down sword strikes, or blocks, it messes up your reload with a ranged weapon as well. And unlike your standard FPS every time you aim your weapon it wobbles because that's how it is in real life, you either time the shot with the breath or hold it even when not looking down a scope.

    Now that I got that out of the way the games combat is brilliantly fun, or annoying to the new player who would just as easily be put off by head shots. It uses a 3 S system, slash, stab, smash. Each damage type has pros and cons, and the starter kit for level 0 shows it the best, the one handed swords slash has no chance at all of doing more then scratching the paint of a set of full plate, thrusting the point in which takes more skill and practice however can actually pierce the once unstoppable plate.

    It also has a very detailed hit box system, so that even in my full plate set, an archer can use painful arrows meant for soft targets by shooting me in the narrow slit in my helm, or the fave spot last night my arm pit which has cloth padding since metal there would make it impossible for me to move my arms. The catch to this is the neck is almost always got mail, cloth or nothing, and face covering helmets impar your vision enabling blind spots. A popular melee move is to use a 2 handed ax that can cut into chainmail to cut off a players head, or if your not that good at aiming like me I swing wildly at the helmet with a 2 handed sword if I see a visor up, hoping for that satisfying slash across my enemies face. With ranged shooting the neck is insane, so legs were shields cant reach or faces with no armor make tempting targets.

    To conclude this game is the most fun I have had in a multiplayer only game in ages, and I own all the latest shooters, and a few other team deathmatch games. The thrill of slapping players in the face when their visors are up, or landing that lucky blow on a plate wearer's flesh or padding is far greater then any other deathmatch experience I have had to date. Even if I die to an arrow to the back of my knee, or armpit every now and then.    … Expand
  2. stranglehold
    Aug 16, 2013
    8
    War of the Roses is modest and pared-down, then but it offers a challenging, chaotic and sometimes comic take on multiplayer. It's an innovative game and I'd like to see it succeed, I'd like to see it grow and, quite honestly, I'd like to see it turn into an eSport.
  3. 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
  4. Jonygold
    Aug 3, 2013
    10
    an excellent game .this game is much better now than it was at launch. is much more realistic than chivalry. in war of the rose there a real system of armor in chivalry you only have more life no real potrecion
  5. GunShy
    Feb 24, 2014
    5
    The game offers pretty great ambiance and sound, but the combat system is sketchy at best. While playing the archer can be fun if you have 7 or 8 buddies acting as axe fodder preventing other players from zerging your position, the hand to hand is abysmal. The execution animations are dull, and seem almost out of place with the fast paced combat. To top it off, the squad spawning causesThe game offers pretty great ambiance and sound, but the combat system is sketchy at best. While playing the archer can be fun if you have 7 or 8 buddies acting as axe fodder preventing other players from zerging your position, the hand to hand is abysmal. The execution animations are dull, and seem almost out of place with the fast paced combat. To top it off, the squad spawning causes the game to devolve into an arm cocked zerging of the closest players to the squad leaders. It's free to play on Steam as of this writing, so I recommend checking it out for the sake of novelty. But I do not recommend buying the game at this time.… Expand
  6. EmuChicken
    Apr 2, 2014
    7
    I really did want to love this game, ever from the trailers being released, but I was left unfulfilled with this title.

    This game as you already know is a team-based "FPS"-styled game themed on Medieval England. You can unlock new weapons and armor through an XP system, XP is earned by killing and winning games online. Graphically, the game does a good job by using the Unreal    I really did want to love this game, ever from the trailers being released, but I was left unfulfilled with this title.

    This game as you already know is a team-based "FPS"-styled game themed on Medieval England.

    You can unlock new weapons and armor through an XP system, XP is earned by killing and winning games online.

    Graphically, the game does a good job by using the Unreal engine. Controls are tight and do well as they should. Players are plentiful, so finding a game in progress is no problem.

    Unfortunately, the one thing that really lets this title down is the balance issue when it comes to them frigging horses.

    It's not unusual to get into a server where the opposition spams with horses. It is fairly obvious that these should be limited to x amount per team. A recent game that manages to pull this off successfully is Natural Selection 2, where the more powerful items appear near the end game.

    There is a "tutorial" system which was fine until it bugged out for me half way through.

    Online there is always the question, "Chivalry or War of the Roses" ? - I dont really care for the question, but what WOTR does very well is with archery. It feels great to get a hit in and there is a sense of instant gratification. Ahhhh! If you prefer to stick swords into the enemy- WITHOUT being annoyed by horses, then I'd lean more towards Chivalry.

    Pros

    + Good, well tested Unreal engine

    + Archery

    + XP system

    + Horses (if you know how to use them)

    Cons

    - Balance Issues

    - Horses (Unbalanced)

    - Hitting with swords feels a little disconnected    … Expand
  7. AlienSpaceBats
    Sep 26, 2013
    5
    There's a good game here somewhere, perhaps best found in a single-player campaign a la Mount & Blade. WotR is poorly balanced and not very fun. In typical MP style new players are given a target to run around in and left to die 50 times before they can unlock something that can stand up to enemy players. Has a very poor tutorial that explained nothing. Combat is unresponsive, frustratingThere's a good game here somewhere, perhaps best found in a single-player campaign a la Mount & Blade. WotR is poorly balanced and not very fun. In typical MP style new players are given a target to run around in and left to die 50 times before they can unlock something that can stand up to enemy players. Has a very poor tutorial that explained nothing. Combat is unresponsive, frustrating and clunky, matches are annoying, basically capture the flag with knights.… Expand
  8. 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!
  9. Galtwho
    Sep 24, 2013
    1
    Strangely, this game is extremely unbalanced. and completely un-policed against hacking. Strange because official servers claim "ANTI-CHEAT: ON"

    Avoid this game as it is a micro-transaction black-hole rivaling the best scams of EA.
  10. Mynameispingu
    Aug 31, 2013
    2
    Don't get me wrong, the customization is what this game managed to put forward in this genre, however the game falls incredibly short in terms of genuine content and gameplay.
    As an avid fan of Mount and Blade: Warband, this game is just appalling in terms of gameplay, weapons seem to have no weight, fighting is incredibly slow (and whatever critic said it was fast paced is deemed    Don't get me wrong, the customization is what this game managed to put forward in this genre, however the game falls incredibly short in terms of genuine content and gameplay.
    As an avid fan of Mount and Blade: Warband, this game is just appalling in terms of gameplay, weapons seem to have no weight, fighting is incredibly slow (and whatever critic said it was fast paced is deemed retarded in my books), awful animations and it just feels floaty as oppose to how battles back then really were.
    Graphics wise it's fairly good
    Music's nice
    But I would not recommend this game to anyone, if you want a proper medieval type action/RPG get Mount and Blade: Warband, or play this and then that.    … Expand
  11. Machiavelli
    Sep 4, 2013
    9
    Despite floaty combat, generally average map design, and some pervasive bugs, War of the Roses provides gameplay that is just plain fun, and the skill based combat as well as the variety of weapons keeps me coming back. Its not technically a 9/10 however I rate it so because of how much fun I got out of this game, which to me is the end all of what a game should do, be immersive,Despite floaty combat, generally average map design, and some pervasive bugs, War of the Roses provides gameplay that is just plain fun, and the skill based combat as well as the variety of weapons keeps me coming back. Its not technically a 9/10 however I rate it so because of how much fun I got out of this game, which to me is the end all of what a game should do, be immersive, challenging and fun.… Expand
  12. DemiGoth
    Dec 4, 2013
    2
    Where to start why NOT to play this game. I think the two most important things are AIM BOTS and PAY2WIN.

    AIM BOTS... Well, how about a player standing at the other side of the map, you can't even see him at all and he 1-shots you with a perfect headshot over and over again. Kinda lame that there's always cheaters in games like these just for the e-peen charts :( PAY2WIN... As it    Where to start why NOT to play this game. I think the two most important things are AIM BOTS and PAY2WIN.

    AIM BOTS... Well, how about a player standing at the other side of the map, you can't even see him at all and he 1-shots you with a perfect headshot over and over again. Kinda lame that there's always cheaters in games like these just for the e-peen charts :(

    PAY2WIN... As it says. Drop real money in the game to get in-game money and buy weapons & upgrades. Without those you close to have no chance to win a battle in this game.

    Then there's also the animations and combat.
    Combat feels slow, but that's how it should be you can't easily swing huge 2-handed sword in a matter of a second. But it's the mechanics around the slow combat system makes combat weird. You can't really aim very well how you want to hit and you just have to hope for the best results.
    And animations, well, they are kinda choppy. It feels like the animations are still in development and only the rough sketches of them were released.    … Expand
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. Cree26
    Nov 12, 2015
    9
    As far as I know the servers have been dead for some time, inundated with hackers, but for a year and a half it was the ride of my life. It took the silly physics of the fighting in M&B to a polished new level. And of course many have complained about the lack of first-person view-mode, but i was really happy about this. FP has no place in hand to hand combat, it is clunky and inelegantAs far as I know the servers have been dead for some time, inundated with hackers, but for a year and a half it was the ride of my life. It took the silly physics of the fighting in M&B to a polished new level. And of course many have complained about the lack of first-person view-mode, but i was really happy about this. FP has no place in hand to hand combat, it is clunky and inelegant and has no place here. Lets be clear, anyone involved in a melee relies heavily on peripheral vision which in FP is quite inadequate.

    The graphics were amazing, visuals were clear, and there were no upgrades that veteran players could accumulate to be overly powerful; it was a level playing field based on skill. I have sunk a total of 320 hours into this beauty and i have to say I miss it.    … Expand
next
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 »