Metascore
60

Mixed or average reviews - based on 14 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 14
  2. Negative: 3 out of 14
  1. A rental is definitely advised for those who are not already familiar with the series.
  2. If this game is played for 15 minutes and then discarded due to the slow speed and pace of the game, you aren’t giving it the patience it deserves.
  3. It took me almost an hour before I GOT King's Field: The Ancient City--and then the experience suddenly became charming, challenging and rewarding.
  4. 66
    Depth is what helps save King's Field from the world of mediocrity. The level of control over your character is most assuredly a nice bonus as you can equip armor on just about every major body part.
  5. Shape up the way the game flows, its speed, and a better control/attack system, and this might be worth looking at.
  6. A slight but meaningful improvement over what it delivered two years ago on PS2 with "Eternal Ring".
  7. Kings Field – a name that has been emblazoned upon our minds by virtue of its sheer incompetence.
  8. 80
    With a better laid-out world, more cleverly hidden treasures, and a great sense of nonlinearity, The Ancient City is a nice bit of evolution for the series.
  9. Gamers looking for big changes in the series, though, won't find the experience much different than earlier King's Field titles.
  10. Gamers willing to stick it out will be rewarded with a lengthy quest and plenty of challenge, but King's Field: The Ancient City is unlikely to create many new converts.
  11. The action is so slow and the world so depressingly medieval. [Apr 2002]
  12. Even with these intriguing traits in place, King's Field: The Ancient City will bore approximately 99.9% of the gamers out there. Primarily because the game is so slow and burdensome. [Apr 2002, p.77]
  13. Too hard...too slow...too ugly. [May 2002, p.107]
  14. It's tedious, wearisome, dreary, slow, stiff, flat and monotonous...in other words, it's an utter bore. [Apr 2002, p.103]
User Score
8.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 6
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 6
  3. Negative: 0 out of 6
  1. Aug 8, 2011
    10
    Pure awesome-ness in game form. Yes, it's slow, and yes, it's frustrating if you die. But these are good things! You're truly afraid to die,Pure awesome-ness in game form. Yes, it's slow, and yes, it's frustrating if you die. But these are good things! You're truly afraid to die, you truly feel like an adventurer exploring cursed lands, and the slower combat allows you to think (which you must do to succeed) to beat your enemies and find the plethora of hidden items and secret places.

    This game is about exploration, about probing an ancient horrific land, and about surviving amidst large hords (impressive unit counts and NO load times, great graphics for the time) of depraved enemies. It has a very Lovecraftian vibe.
    Full Review »
  2. HeadacheBearcub
    Jun 16, 2002
    9
    This game is exactly what I expected from the people at AGETEC. Yes, it is slow. Yes, you will probably die from the most asanine things the This game is exactly what I expected from the people at AGETEC. Yes, it is slow. Yes, you will probably die from the most asanine things the first several hours you put into it...YES it's a cool game. I love the series and hope they make another one with a slightly re-vamped gaming engine...that'd rock. Otherwise, I appreciate the visuals (better than morrowind by the way) and am gonna go play it now... -PFC Neill USMC Full Review »
  3. JonathanR.
    Jun 2, 2002
    10
    This game is VERY good. I hope the bad reviews this game receive won't stop the making of another King's Field title.