Viking: Battle for Asgard PlayStation 3

User Score
7.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 32 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 32
  2. Negative: 4 out of 32
Buy On

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
  1. Apr 24, 2014
    5
    God, I hate this game. I tried to like it, I really did. The story is engaging, the environments are interesting, the enemies are unique, and the characters are decent. The problem lies in the combat. Take the insane amounts of enemies of a Dynasty Warriors game mixed with the frustratingly hard combat of Ninja Gaiden and you have Viking. Enemies are constantly attacking you, so you spendGod, I hate this game. I tried to like it, I really did. The story is engaging, the environments are interesting, the enemies are unique, and the characters are decent. The problem lies in the combat. Take the insane amounts of enemies of a Dynasty Warriors game mixed with the frustratingly hard combat of Ninja Gaiden and you have Viking. Enemies are constantly attacking you, so you spend most of the time blocking. Combos are not quick, and its rare that a game can make dismemberment boring within the first half an hour. Viking manages to do just that.

    Enemies quickly become tiresome due to the sheer volume of them, and unlike Dynasty Warriors, dispatching them is not quick or satisfying. It makes me mad because I wanted to like this game, and felt like it could have been so much more. But poor combat, elemental weapons that add almost nothing to combat, and flaws/poor choices in basic game design hold this game back. I would give this game a 6/10, but that score is marked as a positive, and while parts of this game are enjoyable, they fade from view so quickly that I refuse to give this game higher than a mixed.

    If you want something akin to this but much better, play any of the God of War series. With much more satisfying combos, better game design, and quick time events that do not repeat for every enemy, God of War dismembers this game in so many ways.
    Expand
  2. Sep 16, 2010
    7
    Viking suprized me and I'm very surprized the reviews were so low. I'd like to give viking an 8 but relative to other games I rated 8 it seems out of place so my 7 rating should be viewed as a very high 7. Ok, where to begin? I can't understand the low reviews on this game. It had a few issues but none serious and it was a very very fun game. It seems to be inspired by God of War and maybeViking suprized me and I'm very surprized the reviews were so low. I'd like to give viking an 8 but relative to other games I rated 8 it seems out of place so my 7 rating should be viewed as a very high 7. Ok, where to begin? I can't understand the low reviews on this game. It had a few issues but none serious and it was a very very fun game. It seems to be inspired by God of War and maybe it was viewed as a cheezy rip off and that was enough to rate it low. I don't know but I certainly don't agree with the low rating. The rating and review by CalsonC is very accurate to my own thoughts and so i will expand some more on that review. First off I think this game didn't get a fair chance by many players. If anything the game is very quilty of starting off way too easy and the cinematics aren't on par with God of Wars and maybe explains why so many people turfed this game so easily and reviewed it badly before they even played the entire game. As i look on this site so many people are saying the game is only 10 hrs and is very repetitive. This is quite untrue. It seems a lot of people must have only played the first island and think they beat the game. The first island is around 10 hrs and as i said the game is pretty guilty of starting off too easy so i can understand people thinking the game is nonsence if that is as far as they got. But after the first island the game really gets good. By island two you are now in control of your moves available and start to gain an appreciation of enemy rank and who to take out first so that you are not mobbed. By island 3 you are an extreme viking expert. The game is very nicely paced and gets progressively more difficult but is paced well with the skill you will aquire as you play. The final boss is a really good challenge. This game is also poorly understood. Many people must not have ever played a sandbox game because this game does have good replay value. In a sandbox game it is your decision where to roam and what upgrades you want to make to your game . If the game is too hard you upgrade your attacks. If the game is too easy you don't upgrade. So basically you make your own style. I read a review by a professional and they bashed the game for not having a run button. This person is a terrible gamer and should stick to one dimensional games like pac man. I never needed to run because I used some strategy and acted like a viking. That's the name of the game, not COWARD. Anyway, rant aside the game does have replay value but you have to have creativity and decide how to play the game. The flaws in the game are small. I had a few gltiches and there was very very minimal slowdown in some of the epic battles but these were not at all serious to any of the gameplay. I'm used to games where you have to swing the camera wildly and in this game it was ok although i will acknowledge that this is a larger concern for other players than it is for me. I'm ok incorrporating that into my gameplay but it is quite necessary in this game to do it. What else? Mnnn. I don't know, overall just a very enjoyable game. Easy to play and you can do a bit each night. If you like God of War, maybe give this a chance or a second chance. It really is misrepresented and a fairly decent game. Not a must have or anything but deserves much better than it was rated. Expand
  3. Dec 19, 2013
    7
    This game was a lot of fun. Sure, the graphics are average and there are some technical issues, it can even get repetitive, but a lot of my favorite games weren't technically sound. I did have fun every minute though.
  4. Sep 21, 2016
    7
    Vikings are cool today : the (good) TV show, the new God of War and a lot of smaller projects are based on their universe, but Battle for Asgard came out before the hype so what was its arguments ?

    Technically the game is pretty bad, the graphics are outdated, even for 2008, the animations are as good as any PS2 game and most of all there is huge framerate drops occuring during large
    Vikings are cool today : the (good) TV show, the new God of War and a lot of smaller projects are based on their universe, but Battle for Asgard came out before the hype so what was its arguments ?

    Technically the game is pretty bad, the graphics are outdated, even for 2008, the animations are as good as any PS2 game and most of all there is huge framerate drops occuring during large scale battles, which is the main argument of the game, that can waste all the epicness of fighting with hundreds of characters. They clearly failed in that department and couldn't match their ambition.

    Concerning the gameplay it's a classic hack'n slash game, it's very easy to play and the only challenge in the game comes from the final boss (and even there if you are full of health items it shouldn't worry you), As I said before the main argument of the game is to offer large scale battles with hundred of characters from both side, those battles could be great if the framerate could sustain them. Finally the game design is a bit repetitive, the game is divided in 3 acts and each one as the exact same structure, you won't get any surprised after the first tier of the game. Thankfully they all mix, solo fighting, large scale battles and even some infiltration and the game is globally fun to play.

    The story is also weak, the nordic mythology is underexploited, your character has ni charisma at all and almost all the missions have the same storyline "free them and they'll join your army" it's clearly not a reason to finish the game so if what you want is a good story, pass this one away. The game will last between 12 to 15 hours which is correct for this kind of game.

    In conclusion Viking : Battle for Asgard is clearly a low budget titles with ambitions and fairly entertaining but ultimately technical and writing flaws don't allow the game to be more than average if you're looking for an hack'n slash. Still I think Creative Assembly should try a reboot with the current generation that could clearly offer great battles and taking advantage of the hype around Vikings, it's very unlikely they do so, but I'd like it.
    Expand
Metascore
65

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 38
  2. Negative: 4 out of 38
  1. Electronic Gaming Monthly
    44
    Viking simply doesn't do enough to stand up to the more polished action experiences out there. [June 2008, p.86]
  2. Visceral combat and fort assaults are the main attractions, although the story isn't exactly alluring.
  3. It doesn’t have a multiplayer mode and the audio is only average, but Viking: Battle for Asgard executes what it set out to achieve - fun and addictive gameplay, even if short-lived.