Immortals of Aveum is not a great game. It's average. It shouldn't have crippled the studio that made it.

Avatar image for bigsocrates
bigsocrates

6345

Forum Posts

184

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By bigsocrates

As I played through the battle-wizard FPS campaign of Immortals of Aveum I kept having a recurrent thought. “This is okay, but I can’t believe I paid $70 for it.” I didn’t. I paid $8, and that was for the deluxe edition with a bunch of game breaking equipment I never used. But I’d briefly considered buying it at $70 when it launched just a few months ago and that price was stuck in my brain as I played for some reason.

Immortals of Aveum is an okay game. It’s not broken or half baked like Golum and Skull Island. Its shooting mechanics work well and there’s a novelty to the various magical spell weapons, which seem patterned after the more exotic sci-fi arsenal of a game like Halo rather than straightforward analogs to modern guns. Some of the ancillary powers, like a beam that overloads and stuns enemies and a temporary shield you can summon and shoot through, are pretty fun and original. The progression and equipment systems are well implemented for RPG-light systems (Immortals of Aveum has more and better RPG mechanics than Final Fantasy XVI!) and there are optional puzzles and side areas to search for more loot and extra challenges. The game looks decent, if unspectacular, with aesthetics that seem to crib a lot from games like the modern God of War (specifically Alfheim) but are pleasant enough, even if performance is iffy (especially during cut scenes.) You can tell that there were budgetary limitations based on the sheer number of repeating objects and some mediocre animations, but there are moments where you are manipulating giant statutes or facing giant beasts where it can feel like a true AAA game. Writing and dialog are average, while voice acting performances are above average, especially Gina Torres hamming it up as a Field Marshal. The story is full of too many made up lore terms and really falls apart at the end, but it has its moments. The music is the one notable area where the game is actually downright bad, with short, simple, irritating repeating loops, especially while exploring out of combat. Disappointing considering how many games with absolutely tiny budgets still have amazing soundtracks these days.

Immortals of Aveum is often a game about hiding behind your blue shield shooting out at an enemy with his own blue shield to see whose breaks first. The ability to just stand out in the open and trade (sometimes) in an FPS is actually somewhat novel and changes the feeling of encounters.
Immortals of Aveum is often a game about hiding behind your blue shield shooting out at an enemy with his own blue shield to see whose breaks first. The ability to just stand out in the open and trade (sometimes) in an FPS is actually somewhat novel and changes the feeling of encounters.

Nothing went horribly wrong during the development of Immortals of Aveum. Even the music is just below average, not experience ruining. The game is pretty much what it advertises itself to be and there’s nothing particularly wrong with its conception or design either. People have criticized it for being bland and derivative, and it is a little, but there are some original ideas too. The world building pulls in concepts from high fantasy and some steampunk along with some Lovecraftian elements, and most of the characters are charming enough. The combat has been called “call of duty with spells” but it’s not. There’s no regenerating health (instead you have health crystals you break), and abilities like shield and blink encourage high mobility frenetic combat with liberal use of special abilities and resources. It’s closer to “battlemage Doom (2016)” than anything else, but even that doesn’t quite capture it because it has more puzzles, significant numbers of NPCs to chat with and non-combat areas to explore, and a less brutal difficulty curve (though there are definitely some spikes.) None of it represents a paradigm shift from what came before but it’s competently executed and it feels like a lot of mid-tier games; a remix of tried and true concepts with some unique story, aesthetic, and mechanical concepts integrated to prevent it from being a carbon copy. Immortals of Aveum scored a 69 on Metacritic, which is not a great score by any means but is just one point below a somewhat respectable 7/10. 69 is a nice score, is what I’m saying.

I don't want to downplay the game's flaws. There are a limited number of weapons and though you keep getting new ones throughout the campaign, you've seen all the different types pretty early in the campaign and the tiny range of the red mana weapons is frustrating and makes 2 out of 3 pretty worthless. Enemy variety is also limited and way too many of the bad guys are super tanky, requiring a frustatingly long time to kill. The game isn't very hard because it is liberal with health crystals but it can definitely be annoying, and though I probably died something like 20 times during the course of the campaign and never more than 3-4 times on any one encounter there were lots of times when encounters felt draining and unsatisfying because of how long it took to kill the last enemies. The story is silly and incoherent much of the time, though often in kind of a fun way. Some of the exploration and puzzle elements are frustrating because you don't always know that you lack the tools to solve a puzzle and have to go back later (The game is a semi-Metroidvania in that you can revisit old areas and use new tools to unlock additional loot chests and side content like challenge levels called Shroudfanes.) The use of three colors of magic and coding certain enemies to them is restrictive and annoying, especially because it forces you to spec your character to being able to handle a threat of any color, preventing you from specializing.

On the plus side the pacing between story, exploration, puzzles, and combat isn't bad, and the base combat is fun and satisfying. The upgrades tend to be substantial and go beyond the basic "more damage" "more armor" stuff to more interesting bonuses like making your shield regenerate your health when it takes damage. You get a decent variety of "fury" spells that take up mana and the game gives you enough mana crystals to consistently use them, making combat much more interesting than it would be if you could only rely on your base "sigil" attacks. The game held my attention and the world of Aveum is original enough that I was able to get absorbed in it for long stretches, which is something that I've been having trouble with recently for most games.

So the game is fine, if not spectacular, and it was promoted by EA with a decent advertising campaign in the standard gaming outlets. Immortals of Aveum didn’t slip under the radar from lack of attention. But it still flopped, hard, to the point where half the studio was laid off almost immediately. It was a commercial disaster. 3.5 months after launch it’s half off pretty much everywhere and 90% off on Xbox. It’ll probably be on PS+ or Game Pass within a couple more months, and while it may find an audience there to some degree it won’t be enough to turn things around meaningfully. It’s all time peak on Steam was 751 players. Compare that to High on Life, a game that was probably cheaper to make, and peaked at over 11,000, and which also premiered on Game Pass, which would likely have significantly reduced that number because you don’t use Steam to play the subscription version.

These are two developers from the studio who just saw the Steam sales numbers of Immortals of Aveum.
These are two developers from the studio who just saw the Steam sales numbers of Immortals of Aveum.

Why did Immortals of Aveum fail so badly that it crushed its studio then? Because the market has changed. Not only are there more games than ever but the best of those games are getting longer and longer, and the B-tier games have gotten much cheaper. Even ignoring extreme outliers like Baldur’s Gate, most AAA games are now well over 20 hours. According to howlongtobeat.com Far Cry 6 is almost 24 hours long, while Far Cry 3 is just over 15. That’s a big jump. The days of the 8-10 hour campaign are long gone for single player focused games and when something like Assassin’s Creed Mirage comes out with a 15 hour campaign it’s often priced at a discount (Mirage was $50). This is before we even get into live service games or other multiplayer experiences that can last hundreds of hours and soak up all a player’s time.

And from the other end of the spectrum you have lots of cheaper but still incredible experiences. Astonishingly good indie games with really nice production values, like Neon White or Death’s Door. Those slightly smaller AAA quality games like Hi-Fi Rush, Miles Morales, or big DLCs like Phantom Liberty. The aforementioned High on Life was a $50 game. And with backwards compatibility and better PC compatibility maintenance you have a massive library of older games in your backlog or available at huge discounts to explore. That’s before we get into subscriptions like Game Pass and PS+, which offer hundreds of games in a rotating library, often including some very big heavy hitters you might not have played. The days of “Well I finished my last 10 hour retail disc game, let me see what’s coming out next week” are gone.

So where does that leave games like Immortals of Aveum? As a giant flop. Asking for the same price as Baldur’s Gate 3, Spider-Man 2 or Tears of the Kingdom was never going to work, likely not even if Immortals of Aveum were a better game. Occasionally games like it (relatively short AA single player campaign) do seem to find an audience, but those seem like the exception instead of the rule, to the point where those games are getting rare. A license can help (High on Life didn’t have a license but it did have Justin Rowland pushing it, prior to his downfall) as can being part of a popular franchise, like the Dead Space remake (getting an 89 Metacritic like that game helps too, so quality can help if a game is exceptional.) Launching into Game Pass or PS+ can help but unless you’re owned by Microsoft you can’t exactly guarantee that.

Standing on a giant statue hand and using magic to raise or lower it to create platforms to jump between is not the most original puzzle mechanic but it works and it looks good.
Standing on a giant statue hand and using magic to raise or lower it to create platforms to jump between is not the most original puzzle mechanic but it works and it looks good.

It’s a shame because Immortals of Aveum isn’t really a bad game. It has some good ideas that could have been expanded on in a sequel or just another game from a now more experienced studio (this was Ascendant Studios’ first game; they may make another in their scaled down state but it won’t be at the production level of Immortals of Aveum.) I don’t think I’d be happy to have bough it at $70, but at $8 it satisfied my desire for a linear, mid-length, campaign I could sink my teeth into for a few longer play sessions and then set aside, probably never to play again. I reminded me a lot of Outriders, another game I mostly enjoyed while it lasted.

But even as someone who likes these kinds of games I don’t have a solution for their commercial failings. “Make them better,” “sell them cheaper and hope that helps,” “try to get on Game Pass or PS+” are all ideas it is impossible to reliably execute on. As a customer I’m as guilty as anyone else. I have a friend who was playing through Aveum and we sometimes like to play games in parallel so we can discuss them, but in this case I balked even at $30 when it was previously discounted. It was only when it got under $10 that I was willing to take the plunge, and even though I got it very cheap I couldn’t help but be almost offended by the original price.

Riding Leylines like giant ziplines looks kind of cool, and Devyn is a very fun character who I quite liked.
Riding Leylines like giant ziplines looks kind of cool, and Devyn is a very fun character who I quite liked.

In the olden days a studio that put out a game like Immortals of Aveum would probably get at least one or two more chances. The game would sell better, the publisher would be more understanding (though we are talking about EA) and the next game or the one after that would likely be much better and have a better chance of being a hit. Now the studio is not yet shuttered but is crippled, and a lot more studios have suffered similar fates for delivering one game that failed to meet expectations. It’s one thing when you put out a garbage fire like Gollum, but games like Immortals of Aveum have value. Just not enough value in the modern market. Games are too expensive to make and take too long, and the market is too competitive. There’s room for the great, sometimes room for the good, and almost no room for the average, at least without the support of a valuable IP of some sort.

But most games that new studios put out are going to be average. A lot of games are going to be average. It’s bad for the industry when average means not just that the product fails but that the studio fails too. If the average result is failure how many people are going to want to try?

Basically the studio after this game released.
Basically the studio after this game released.
Avatar image for mach_go_go_go
mach_go_go_go

523

Forum Posts

144

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

In a world where I had infinite time and resources, I would consider picking this up on sale and occasionally noticing it in my steam library for 5 to 10 years after the date of purchase before maybe attempting to play it at some point.

The problem, at least for me personally, is that I don't have infinite anything, and there are too many really great games worth playing right now, so even that ever-coveted "I bought this and will play it eventually" pile in my library is brimming with GOTY material like Resident Evil 2 Remake, Dwarf Fortress, Deathloop, etc. I have no intention of ever playing anything Rockstar ever makes ever again, and that's okay - I don't have to. There are already too many other games.

I don't know - maybe, overall, games are just too good now.

Avatar image for bigsocrates
bigsocrates

6345

Forum Posts

184

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By bigsocrates

@mach_go_go_go: I basically agree with your take, which is not too far from my own.

I would not have bought this game if my friend wasn't playing it. Or I would have bought it and backlogged it, because it was prettty cheap and I still get distracted by sales.

That being said, there is something nice about games that you don't care that much about. About the pretty, kind of easy, simple campaign that you just plow through. So many games can feel intimidating or demanding and the "just turn off your brain and shoot" appeal works well when combined with "good" graphics and general polish.

Indie games can take some of this space but I think there's still room in my gaming diet for B-tier games that just aren't asking a lot. Popcorn films, more or less, but with digitized actors.

These used to be super common but now they're rare and...I like them enough that it makes me kind of sad.

Avatar image for sethmode
SethMode

3667

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By SethMode

Thanks for sharing this...I found I really enjoyed the demo, but then I often really enjoy demos of competently made games because they're usually pretty tightly designed. I had to remind myself of this when it was over and I was being tempted to pay like 35 bucks for it at half off. I still want to play this, but I feel vindicated in my decision not to drop 35 (and especially not 70) on this on the fear that it might never be better than the demo.

I'll probably still give it a go, either at a cheaper price or on Game Pass, just because I do kind of miss its fun, b game vibe, but I guess I'm not surprised to hear it kind of deflates by the end.

Avatar image for bigsocrates
bigsocrates

6345

Forum Posts

184

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@sethmode: Thank you for reading.

I would not buy this at $35 unless you really want to play it right now for some specific reason for the simple fact that it's going to dip further pretty quickly. Or it will end up on Game Pass. Probably both.

I don't know how long the demo is but I do think the game gets better than its opening. It probably peaks somewhere around the middle or a little past that. And it doesn't decline in a steep drop off. It just does that thing a lot of games do where it has introduced all its mechanics and enemy types and abilities and it strings together a bunch of more difficult and complex encounters until the final boss. With admittedly a little bit of a break near the end for some sort of interesting world/story exposition.

I should note that I'm someone who almost never loves the ends of games. Unless I'm really into the story or characters or it's a game I'm flat out in love with I generally find the ramp up in difficulty and repetitiveness of most game endings annoying. It's not that I'm not skilled enough to finish games (I SWEAR) it's just that tougher encounters don't do much for me and I'm usually getting bored of a game's mechanics by the time I'm getting close to the finish. Also I hate final boss fights for the most part.

So YMMV.

Avatar image for ginormous76
Ginormous76

509

Forum Posts

114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

@bigsocrates: I also grabbed the deluxe edition for $8. Barely started it though. I assume it's going to pick up shortly (only like an hour in).
Yeah, this is a perfect example of where capitalism is today. If you aren't the biggest thing or you aren't being made for so cheap you can just exist, you are going to die.

Avatar image for bigsocrates
bigsocrates

6345

Forum Posts

184

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ginormous76: It definitely picks up after the first hour. As I said it keeps adding mechanics and abilities until about the 2/3rds part and while they're not all amazing they definitely provide more choices in combat. The enemies also improve.

There is a real problem with winner take all capitalism right now, especially in gaming.

Avatar image for av_gamer
AV_Gamer

2896

Forum Posts

17819

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 13

#7  Edited By AV_Gamer

Just finished Immortals of Aveum, and overall, I think it's a shame the game was trashed the way it was after release. It's not a masterpiece by any means, or even a buried treasure, but the game is far from the disaster some mainstream publications were claiming it was. Thanks to PS Plus, I was able to play this game, and finished it after three days and enjoyed myself. I'll quickly go over the pros and cons I've found while playing it.

Pros:

Decent storyline that is well acted. The game has a star-studded cast playing the different characters, and they all do their parts well. One complaint critics seems to have, was them not liking the main character. I think he did a decent job, overall. The graphics and presentations are above average. The gameplay is fun and keeps you on your toes. This is mainly because of the three different spells you have to keep switching on the fly during fights, and this gets more frantic as you get towards the climax of the game. You also use the spells and gadgets based on the spells to unlock different puzzles, which isn't too bad. The game concludes at a decent length, so it doesn't overstay its welcome. You can continue to play after you've beaten the story to do a side quest where you hunt down some powerful magus, solve more puzzles for items, or start a new game plus.

Cons:

The gameplay gets repetitive after a while. You don't fight a lot of enemy variety in the game. You face the basic grunts you find in any game: The melee guy, the range guy, the big guy with the big weapon, the rampaging animal, and the magic specialist. There is also the giants, but those fights never got boring to me. This game reminds me a lot of Ryse: Son of Rome. That game also had very little enemy variety, but the story and great overall presentation made up for it. Of course, Ryse was a character action game, not a first-person shooter. The controls can sometime betray you because of the switching you must do while playing. It didn't happen a lot, but when it did, it was annoying, especially when I was trying to heal.

Overall, I give the game a solid 7/10. You can buy it now for pretty cheap, but if you have PS Plus you can play it with your subscription. It was a nice distraction after I finished FF7: Rebirth and would recommend it, if you're looking for something quick to breeze through while you're waiting for your next big game.

Avatar image for bigsocrates
bigsocrates

6345

Forum Posts

184

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@av_gamer: I agree with most of what you said here, including that it's about a 7/10 and a really solid PS+ title. I hope it finds an audience there, though that won't lead to a sequel at this point.

I don't really know why certain reviewers savaged it either. I've seen some reviewers that I like saying "It's fun, not worth the price, but a good pickup for cheap or on a subscription service" which is where we both come out, but a lot seemed angry at it, or said it was extremely low quality including putting it on worst of the year lists.

There's a lot of good stuff in Immortals of Aveum, including some really cool set pieces and fun world building. I wish most bad games had this much to like!

I will say that apparently PC performance was bad at launch, and that's something I think studios need to be more aware of if they need good reviews. A lot of reviewers prefer PC but will heavily ding a game if it has performance issues. They should just give out console codes only if they can't make the PC version perform well, because while PC consumers do deserve good performance and to be warned about those problems, a game can get buried forever if one version has those issues (which are usually, though not always, fixed eventually) even if the other versions are good.

Avatar image for junkerman
Junkerman

867

Forum Posts

371

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 6

#9  Edited By Junkerman

I started playing this game after seeing this article, it was a freebie on PS-Plus - and idk its just one of those games that really grabs me. I'm a huge nerd and having a wizard fantasy adventure skin for what is essentially just shooter mechanics kinda worked for me.

I found it had kind of Halo-Esque momentum and I really enjoyed leaning into the frantic pace of the combat using all of the tools it gives you.

The story is silly and dumb but well animated. It was weird - it feels like a AAA from like 2010 that holds up okay by todays standards idk. I liked it.

I LIKED IT EVERYONE!

Its this year's Midnight Sons for me I guess.