Rune: Viking Warlord

 PlayStation 2
Metascore
53

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 16
  2. Mixed: 9 out of 16
  3. Negative: 6 out of 16
Buy Now
Buy on
  1. Gaming Age
    75
    A long, epic adventure that has a few problems here and there, but still stays entertaining.
  2. Hot Games
    70
    The game’s ugliness is its major flaw, though the free-roaming nature of many of the levels can be frustrating too.
  3. GameSpy
    68
    A decent game, with both good and bad points. Nothing to wait in line for though, and not one you're likely to lose sleep over.
  5. Gamezilla!
    62
    A game that looks like it could have been put out on the PlayStation, with poor controls, zero character development and below par graphics.
  6. GamerWeb Sony
    60
    A good story and simple control can't make up for a serious lack of depth, mediocre graphics, and a camera that gets more annoying as time goes on.
  7. IGN
    55
    By Christmastime there's going to be 3D action games on PS2 that put this to shame.
  8. TotalGames.net
    50
    By Great Odin’s teeth, this is an average game of the most average order. Dull alsö.
  9. PSX Nation
    50
    A platform and puzzle game with miniscule amounts of action through a strong storyline.
  10. Core Magazine
    50
    In the end it's just a run-of-the-mill action game with few assets and lots of faults.
  11. GamePen
    50
    If we could look past the sub par visuals and lengthy load times, I guess this could be a decent game. But if we could do that, then why did we buy a PS2 in the first place?
  12. GameSpot
    49
    It disregards almost everything about Vikings that make them interesting. Its graphics are some of the worst on the PS2, the gameplay is dull and repetitive, and its uninspired multiplayer mode adds little value.
  13. GameZone
    45
    Though I could not find a stopwatch I would say that I spent around a quarter of my time in the confines of the load screen.
  14. Electronic Gaming Monthly
    40
    Never thought Vikings could be so boring. [Oct 2001, p.148]
    All this publication's reviews
  15. G4 TV
    40
    It has plenty of significant flaws mixed with some excellently done gameplay elements.
  16. Game Revolution
    25
    A big disappointment, a shoddy port that suffers due to both the limitations of its new platform and its technical pitfalls.
  17. Cinescape
    16
    The side-to-side/spinning problem will plague you throughout the rest of the game, if you attempt to make it that far. Even if you manage to master the controls, I cannot see you having that much fun with this game.

Awards & Rankings

97
#97 Most Discussed PS2 Game of 2001
76
#76 Most Shared PS2 Game of 2001

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 13 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 13
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 13
  3. Negative: 2 out of 13
  1. iamevilhomer
    Apr 23, 2017
    6
    The bad...

    Terrible load times. Some times taking close to a minute to load. Graphics are worse than N64 games even though it's a ps2    The bad...

    Terrible load times. Some times taking close to a minute to load.

    Graphics are worse than N64 games even though it's a ps2 game.

    Combat is somewhat simple.

    Enemy A.I is easy to out smart once you get the hang of the games hit detection.

    Music isn't very memorable.

    Some glitches that can be fun some times but for the most part lame.

    The good...

    Fun to play in multiplayer against a friend in split screen. Especially that gladiator arena.

    Story isn't bad at all actually. Typical Viking mythology storyline about a young hero rising up against a great evil and whooping it's @$$.

    Long campaign mode that isn't short at all so it's not a short game. No one likes a 2 hour campaign or 4 hour campaign. Looking at you "The Bouncer".

    Cheat codes make the game hilarious lol.

    Simple combat but still has a skill gap that can only be mastered by playing a lot. Basically knowing precise timing of when to strike with certain weapons and knowing how they work.

    It's not a very good game but I liked it personally because of who I am. I don't really give a crap about graphics since real games don't care about visuals compared to game play. I don't really give a crap about the long load times because I'm patient. Plus it was the PS2 age... Games loaded long back then anyways...

    So this game gets around a 5-7 for someone like me...    … Full Review »
  2. WillT
    Dec 28, 2009
    8
    This is a very underated game, sure graphics are a major issue for the game but there is much more positives than negatives, Positives: good This is a very underated game, sure graphics are a major issue for the game but there is much more positives than negatives, Positives: good storyline, brilliant controls, fun to play, lots of replay value and great multiplayer, negatives.... graphics look like majoras mask on the N64, too much loading. 8*… Full Review »
  3. Cody
    May 5, 2003
    10
    Best game ever i dont mind graphics.
See all user reviews »