Mixed or average reviews - based on 11 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 11
  2. Negative: 2 out of 11
  1. One of the freshest, most satisfying games produced by Impressions in years, and it's a great real-time strategy game in its own right.
  2. For a budget title you'll be amazed at the quality of the presentation and the depth of the gameplay.
  3. 75
    Lords of the Realm III doesn't look like a budget game -- its production values are high, as the 3D graphics are serviceable and the sound very well-done -- but at times it certainly plays like one.
  4. It is truly a shame that many clever ideas are obscured by the game's lackluster manual, because its blend of real-time strategy and tactics is an innovative re-working of the genre. [July 2004, p.62]
  5. A good, solid buy for new strategists but veteran generals will struggle to find long-term entertainment.
  6. Given the series' heritage and the long buildup to this entry, it's hard not to feel let down. [July 2004, p.70]
  7. 64
    Without offering a little more depth to either the tactical or strategic aspects of the game, we're left with two experiences that are integrated well enough but leave us wanting more.
  8. 62
    Gameplay is horrendously simple...Ultimately, Lords of the Realm 3 was a big letdown. It is still a rather decent game, but nowhere near as deep as its predecessor.
  9. 60
    But the interface provides the real horror show, with cryptic icons, buttons that have mysterious functions, and information displayed in a way that's difficult to understand.
  10. A clumsy, series-ending combo of real-time and strategy...You must kind of hang out and gawk at numbers and icons. [July 2004, p.72]
  11. God knows what happened to LOTR3, but the usually dependable Impressions Games has lost the plot on this one. Even if you're a long-standing fan of the series - no, especially if you are one - avoid this like a bearded, Black Death-infected Saxon whore.
User Score

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 20 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 18
  2. Negative: 13 out of 18
  1. sr
    Jun 13, 2008
    Yeah, this is nothing more than a really long demo beta in my book. Nothing like the last games, almost no depth to the game. Those that gave 10, are part of the groups that do false posts to raise something and work for the companies. "decent amount of carnage for any experienced player" umm.. what carnage, there isn't even blood and bodies just disappear. It was as if it came out in 2001 and just hit the stores now. Full Review »
  2. CorrieT.
    Dec 28, 2007
    So disappointed, lor2 was a great strategy game lor3 is just a mess, easy to win, no thought involved in game play -except to keep having to find your army and land in the poorly developed interface.. I've been looking forward to playing this game for a while, just a big disappointment. Full Review »
  3. Alex
    Jul 26, 2007
    Terrible game. The combat AI is silly : very bad compared to stronghold 2 or Knights of Honor. Also the sieges are silly compared to these 2 games. The strategy map is a good idea: all happens in real time, but the quality is inferior to Knights of Honor. To sum up, in my opinion it's a game sold at an early Beta stage. Not very serious from Sierra. Full Review »