Lords of the Fallen

Lords of the Fallen has a lot to offer but is largely held back by technical issues throughout, and the further I progressed through the game, the more striking these problems became, escalating from a few dips in framerate to hard crashes and glaring pop-in.

There’s around 40 hours of gameplay in here, and loads more if you want to properly explore every part of this devastatingly dark land. It looks medieval, dark, like a bloody horror film and it plays tough.

Lords of the Fallen is an exciting kind of Sous-like. Whereas many others aim to perfect the formula, Lords of the Fallen’s goal is to innovate. It certainly has its own array of problems, like lacking audio, repetitive enemy types, and combat that could be tightened up a little. However, when the game sinks its claws into you with its thrilling dual world mechanic, you won’t be able to get enough of it.

If CI Games should solve the performance issues on PS5, Lords of the Fallen is nothing less than one of the best Soulslike games so far. The game might be very similar in some of its basics, but cleverly makes use of its dual-layered game world that makes Lords of the Fallen stand out from the often trite Dark Souls clones. When the slowdown problem is gone, Lords of the Fallen isn't just a worth buy, it is a need to buy for any fan of the genre.

Engaging combat, brilliant boss fights, and top-notch level design that is amplified further by the creative dual-world mechanics introduced by Umbral, all coalesce into a version of Lords of the Fallen that not only leaves its predecessor in the dust but moves the genre forward in meaningful ways. That being said, it’s difficult to ignore the lackluster performance that significantly impacts upon the experience of the opening few hours, resulting in Lords of the Fallen not being the absolute recommendation that it should be.

Lords of the Fallen is a really good action RPG. The combat system is good, the music and visual style are good, and the world we find ourselves in is both interesting and tempting to explore. Without the technical problems, this would have been another notch up on the points scale.

Miles better than its predecessor, but still not outstanding: Lords of the Fallen is a rock-solid Soulslike in which a few major strengths collide with many small weaknesses.

I see a parallel between Lords of the Fallen and Dark Souls II: there’s something amiss here and there, but the game is trying its best. Everybody knows there are better, more polished titles in this genre, but what LotF lacks in terms of gameplay or technical execution, it makes up for with interesting ideas, solid boss battles or the unique atmosphere of Umbral, the realm of the dead. I recommend giving it a chance, because in most part it is a decent game.

Lords of the Fallen tries again with this kind of reboot and partially succeeds. The switching between weapons and items in combat is very nice and the two worlds are also very cool to explore, thanks in part to the visual presentation and audio. The downside, however, is the unstable frame rate, the lack of variety in enemies over time and crashes, which impact the enjoyment of play.

Lords of the Fallen lacks refinement in every respect, but is nevertheless a nice addition to the soulslike genre. The choice for Unreal Engine 5 is unfortunate, the difficulty level is anything but balanced and the number of excruciatingly bad bosses cannot be counted on one hand, and yet everything together forms an entertaining whole packed with content and also a nice stepping stone to a really good soulslike.

A repetitive Dark-Souls-by-numbers is livened up by a universe-swapping idea. Hey, why doesn’t FromSoft steal that idea for its next game? Seems only fair. [Issue#34, p.84]

While there are obviously some differences, Lord of the Fallen is very similar to Dark Souls. Sadly though, Lords of the Fallen is nowhere near as polished or well made as one would expect from a Dark Souls game. Its implementation of two worlds layered on top of each other is more cumbersome than interesting, there is a huge lack in enemy variety, enemy positioning can be too unforgiving, and technical issues like an unstable framerate and bad camerawork can be added to the long list of its shortcomings. On top of all that, the second playthrough is way too demanding and makes the first playthrough feel distorted.

Given the amount of time between Lords of the Fallen’s initial outing and its reboot, this new release feels far less like an attempt to right the ship and more like its own thing. This is a positive, as it certainly forges a strong identity of its own, and provides a robust amount of content to back it up. But much like its predecessor, it struggles to push past its self-imposed limitations, in this case revolving around its combat system and dual-world gimmick. With frustrating encounter designs and a need to fine-tune some aspects, the game veers from joyful to jarring and back again far too frequently to let a sense of fun be its main takeaway.

There is, at least, plenty to build on with the inevitable sequel, retaining all of this instalment's finer points and knocking the obvious dents out of its armour - a Lords of the Fallen 2.5, perhaps. [Issue#391, p.102]

Lords of the Fallen is a game I really wanted to like. The seamless transition between worlds is a joy to witness but it wears out its welcome quickly. Combat feels weighty and has plenty of neat twists. Unfortunately, the enemy hordes make engaging with combat feel like a chore. Level design hits some highs but the lows are agonising to traverse and I just left this game feeling frustrated. It's divisive, oppressive and I just can't bring myself to fully recommend it.

Lords of the Fallen is a satisfying action RPG and a remarkable soft reboot of a franchise that nobody thought had a future. There’s so much more soul here than the 2014 original, along with plenty of depth for those who want to engage deeply with its systems. This includes the fully malleable customization, in which classes can equip any gear once the stat requirements are met, essentially morphing mid-playthrough. It’s unfortunate that a genuinely great game is sullied by a severe lack of polish.

When the FPS isn’t dipping, and bosses aren’t cheesing you every step of the way, LotF feels good. But with myriad performance issues, broken multiplayer, and boss fights that increase difficulty through unfair mechanics as opposed to well-developed ones, it really weighs down on the experience. Lords of the Fallen is indeed a Soulslike. And for some, that’s all they need. But be prepared for a challenge to complete the journey, and not in a good way.

Lords of the Fallen is a game of uneven quality. At its best, it offers level design, bosses, and combat that’s generally up there among the best Souls-likes. At its – more often – worst, it leans hard on quantity over quality, and a fundamental misunderstanding of what makes those games challenging. My issues with its balance and difficulty can improve with patches, and my misgivings about its design pitfalls are the sort of thing that sequels improve on all the time. It’s left me wanting to play Lords of the Fallen 2.

I am quite sure that some people will absolutely love the intensity of the horror and dark fantasy that infuses Lords of the Fallen. As cartoonishly silly as it comes across by trying so hard, it is technically impressive. Similarly, the game is perfectly solid mechanically, and while it does have some issues with pacing and the design of some boss battles, it is, for the most part, very playable. I had more fun with this than I think it deserved, and while I’m not sure whether I was laughing with it or at it most of the time, I was definitely laughing and having fun with it. Who knows? Perhaps satirising the self-seriousness of dark fantasy was the entire creative point and if so, bravo developers, you nailed it.

Ultimately, Lords of the Fallen is a good enough "Soulsborne" entry, but a number of its technical issues and gameplay foibles stop it from being truly great.