Piranha Bytes quietly released the Xbox 360 port Risen to European audiences in October of last year, and brought it across the Atlantic at the end of February. Risen is arguably overshadowed by Piranha Bytes' other (and popular) dark fantasy fantasy role playing games, and it's a long time coming. Unfortunately, whether or not it was worth the wait will depend on your ability to forgive and forget.
Risen's not that good, crushed under the weight of its own scope. Taken individually, Risen's mechanics range from mildly offensive to brilliant; taken together, they're an amalgam of poorly executed and often conflicting ideas, each of which draw out the worst of the others.
Risen is a Möbius Strip of muddy design.

Risen (Xbox 360)
Developer: Piranha Bytes, Wizarbox
Publisher: Deep Silver
Released: February 23, 2010
MSRP: $49.99
Por ejemplo, you'll discover soon enough that Faranga, Risen's tropical setting, is lush and seamless. As your nameless, shipwrecked castaway wanders (often aimlessly) about the island, he won't find any invisible walls or loading screens. The environments are sharply detailed, and the fauna roam free -- it's not unheard of to find, say, a pack of wolves attacking a group of gravemoths, or a clan of gnomes cooking meals and tending to their (stolen) homesteads. Usable, pickable plants are everywhere -- a sprig of mint restores some mana, a green apple some health. Backed by a dynamic weather system and surprisingly competent lighting effects, Risen sells Faranga surprisingly well.
Exploring Faranga only gets more interesting as your player-character gains access to magic. Using a levitation scroll to access previously unassailable crooks and crannies has a certain zen-like quality, and looking out over the land and sea from the tops of mountains is simultaneously serene and empowering. Faranga can be truly beautiful, and it's nice to know that your visual rewards are the fruits of your ingenuity (that, and your ability to spam the jump button as needed). There is always something to see and do on Faranga, and exploration is often rewarding: it keeps your coffers well stocked and encourages experimentation and individuality.
The island's towns and cities show similar attention to detail: the docks of Harbour Town feel lived in as you cavort with soldiers and sailors, cutthroats and clergymen, sellswords and whores. And while the NPCs you'll meet are all relatively flat, they're also realistically flat: they don't let you steal from them in broad daylight, they mill about, they solicit you for charity or sex. I remind you that Risen is game about a man with a magic monocle on his eye who fights giants; but, relative to other games in the genre, the suspension of disbelief is fairly easy to come by.

Unfortunately, for all the fun to be had by exploring Faranga, you won't really want to, thanks to Risen's broken combat. I can forgive Risen for having unintuitive combat controls -- actually, most of the user interface is unintuitive, a vestige of its PC origins -- but not for being unresponsive. While Risen's character growth system allows you to add points to your weapon choice, everything but the most basic attack feels sluggish and therefore useless. Even after thirty-odd hours, the most effective attack was the default one. Ranged attacks -- bows, crossbows, magic -- are slightly more engaging, but the end result is still something akin to attrition.
To their credit, the Farangan enemies are clever -- they will attack in groups, they will try to flank you, and they rarely stick to an attack pattern -- but Risen doesn't give you the tools to handle the onslaught. Never mind the fact that every killer badger and gravemoth on the entire island is blessed with the ability to read minds.
Not only does Risen's combat make exploring the island decidedly frustrating -- and breaking the best part of the game -- it also ruins any notion of character progression. Given that a.) the combat is badly executed and b.) adding skill points to combat-oriented doesn't change that fact, I'd wager that most players will spend their points learning crafts -- alchemy, lockpikcing, smithing, prospecting, hunting -- and buying incremental upgrades to dexterity and strength. Since Risen never bothers to explain what, exactly, the strength and dexterity stats govern, those purchases ring hollow.

Turning your character into a varied craftsman, on the other hand, is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, being able to craft potions and weapons, and steal from townsfolk, and harvest skins will quickly line your pockets, breaking the in-game economy. On the other, it's one of the few ways to take full advantage of Faranga's bounty. Setting off into one of Faranga's many caves to mine a gold vein, only to take it back into town to forge yourself a new necklace is satisfying and rewarding. And since you amass your raw materials during the course of normal play, it never feels like a chore.
My last gripe with the Risen's dogged determination to undermine itself through its shoddy combat is the way it handles emergent play. I mentioned earlier that most of Risen's NPCs act realistically -- if you're slick, you can lead enemy creatures into groups of villagers or soldiers, prompting them to jump to your (much needed) aid. This will seem like a viable strategy until you realize that your player-character doesn't receive any experience points for its effort.
Not only does Risen punish the natural instinct to explore its beautiful world by interrupting you with shitty combat against stupidly unbalanced enemies, but it also withholds the spoils of war when you try to be smart about it.
Neat.

Risen fares better in populated areas, if only because there's not as much fighting. Farangan towns are filled, as I mentioned, by relatively realistic people, most of them with a name, a backstory, and a quest for you to complete. These range from bog-variety fetch quest to sprawling sagas in their own right, stretching over dozens of hours.
These quests are tucked away in a journal, ostensibly paired with a map marking exactly where you should go next. Unfortunately, this doesn't often work -- your instructions are often vague and, even when your map decides to include markers (this isn't always the case), it's often unhelpful, especially for longer quests. There's a fine line between exploration and wandering, and Risen stumbles over it often, falling into the pitfalls I've already mentioned. Risen's hands-off mission architecture isn't something I would normally take umbrage with -- a little lateral thinking and independence never hurt anyone, and I don't expect my videogames to play themselves -- but it becomes a problem when coupled with Risen's other shortcomings.
But if no one wants you to leave town, Risen is pure joy.
Three factions vie for control of Faranga's magical artifacts -- Don Esteban's bandits, the Warriors of the Order, and the Mages, the latter two united under the same religious leader -- and Risen's lengthy prologue lets you play these groups against each other for fun and profit. Even after you've committed yourself to a group, there are plenty people in each camp with conflicting interests, and squeezing as much information and resources from any given group without compromising your position with the other gives you a sense of purpose and agency that the narrative and combat lack.
And while Faranga's often unpredictable weather can be a hindrance -- it's hard to explore if you can't see -- townspeople respond to it logically. They'll go back inside, making it harder to steal from them, for example; at night, the whores and guards come out and the pubs become crowded.
Unfortunately, though Risen really shines in its cityscapes, they're also where the game also starts to show its seams. The dialogue is competently written, and voice acting (hell, the sound design in general) is surprisingly strong, though the dialogue trees aren't particularly sophisticated. More distracting, however, is that the same half- dozen glitchy character models populate the entire island; and the animations are muddy at best and horrific at worst -- more than once, bodies have turned themselves around, only to leave still-talking heads turned around backwards.
I'm not one to judge a game by its budget, but it's a shame that Risen again turns what should've been its strong suit -- NPC interaction -- into a cause for criticism.

I think I skipped the plot summary portion of this review -- that goes at the beginning, right? -- but here goes: don't worry about it. It absolutely plods along and very little, in the grand scheme of the game, happens in the first twenty hours. Not only are NPC subplots and backstories more interesting than Risen's boilerplate fantasy, but the game, as usual, shoots itself in the foot with its delivery.
Risen would be slow even under the best circumstances -- which doesn't necessarily bother me -- but it's impossible to know which quests are important and which are peripheral, so you'll spend a lot of time lost and dying, accomplishing nothing, feeling frustrated by the combat. Without any narrative momentum to push you roughshod through the game's busted mechanics, Risen feels that much more alienating.
On the flipside, most everything gets better as time moves on -- the fundamentally busted combat notwithstanding -- but I'd be hardpressed to recommend Risen after the 30 hours I've spent with it so far.
Writing recently about videogames and cocaine addiction, essayist Tom Bissell states that "video games, you see, have no edge. You have to appreciate them. They do not come to you." Insofar as Risen is concerned, there's some truth to this. Somewhere, hidden in foreboding mountain peaks, deep under a gloomy cave, or in the back of a forgotten whorehouse, there is fun to be had in Risen. To be honest, I'll probably keep looking for it -- but I'll do so armed with a walkthrough and the knowledge that playing Risen might be a game of diminishing returns.
Score: 4 -- Below Average (4s have some high points, but they soon give way to glaring faults. Not the worst games, but are difficult to recommend.)

Personally, I enjoyed Risen more than I enjoyed other recent RPGs with bigger names. I highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in RPGs and a decent PC.
I wish more RPGs had a game world as interesting as Risen does.
But, I'd imagine you would want to mention in there somewhere how horrible this version is compared to other versions that are on the market, right? So that way people can make informed decisions about which would be the wisest for them to purchase.
As others have said, the PC game is well deserving of anyone's time who might be interested, especially if you enjoyed Gothic or past Elder Scrolls titles with less hand-holding (such as Morrwind).
Also how sad that beyond port issues, the author seems to want Risen to be a game it is not, a more casual mainstream game.
This review is pointless and absurd, if you ask me, a fan of PC RPGs. Even Game Informer gave the damn thing an 8.5.
Oh well, it's not like I come here for the great reviews anyway.
Back to Mass Effect then.
@RenagadePanda
AMEN BROTHA!!!!
Still, I'd of recomended the PC one too, if only for the fact that the annoying bits can be modded out.
As a side note, that article about cocaine and GTA IV is fascinating.
@ RenegadePanda: Agreed, 100%
You really think you need to update your computer every other year in order to play a game like Risen. That's the first reason you sound like an idiot.
Secondly, it's not "elitest" when one version is clearly better then another version. Just because you can't play it doesn't mean other people don't want to know what their choices are.
I mean jesus christ, every time somebody mentions something that you may not personally partake in do you fucking shout at them for bringing it up? I bet you're a riot to hang out with.
So you want them to ignore the shitty port? People who can only have a console might see this game and think "oh this looks fun", hey thats only what 60 dollars wasted. Just because you personally don't play the console doesn't mean you should shout at them for bringing up this versions clear problems.
Wanting a game with combat that isn't a piece of shit isn't "casual," it's "not being stupid."
congratulations on finally finishing the review of this game
now hopefully you dont have to play it ever again
I'm presuming Orcist reviewed this version because that is what he acquired. To demand he review every version their is is rather demanding, sheesh.
@ Orcist
If you're not put off this game I recommend playing the PC version.
Thats an awful statement. Game Informer's rating floor ends at 8.5.
Interesting, I guess if I said The Orange Box is better on Xbox than EA's port for PS3 it would make me a 360 fanboy? Get real.
Shit, shut the hell up and read and enjoy the review.
And for the record, the PC version is better, but the game is still terribly mediocre. Sorry.
I certainly hope those aren't words you're putting in my mouth, since I never said anything remotely resembling that.
And for the record, the PC version is better, but the game is still terribly mediocre. Sorry.
Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more. Opinions are fun.
A few things.
1) PC games and good ports of PC games are NOT mutually exclusive. There are plenty of good PC-->console ports that play just fine.
2) You do NOT - repeat - DO NOT need to update your PC "every year". That's an old wives tale. I made a pretty rockin' machine for around $700 (a little more than a launch console), and I haven't had to update it yet at all - I can still run the latest games.
In fact, PCs have plateaued to the point where your upgrades are actually LESS money than the startup costs of a NEW console (ie the Xbox 720/Natal, or PS4/Move, or buying four motion plus accessories for your Wii).
Joseph Leray is one of the most stand up guys you can find on the entire internet - his review was honest, and I think he easily explained why the game was bad on it's own merits.
@Renegade
I could say the exact same thing about consoles.
I really wish specific console elitists would shut up once and awhile. I don't want to have to buy all three consoles, I never will, I don't have the money or motivation to have to buy Motion Plus or the billions of other accessories I will eventually need, and keep it updated every other year with current technology. I play on PC; I'm not 'choosing the wrong version', I'm playing it on what I have available.
I love you, but your comment made absolutely no sense at all.
I would argue for a game like Dragon Age, a game that has it's roots as a PC game, a game that Bioware said straight up "is meant for the PC", should be reviewed on both platforms. It just makes sense.
But Risen? It's not like people knew the port was going to be bad. And Destructoid doesn't really have that many PC reviewers outside of Aaron Linde [and now Jim to an extent]. They can't force people to get a good computer if they're just contributing for no pay - eventually they will have more PC reviews, but there's no use crying over spilled milk.
Well I never said "port issues aside" so let me clarify.
The amazing PC version never got a review from this site. Now you review the Xbox version and do not mention the superior PC version within the review at all, you just dog the game with no context. If people are reading this review to see if Risen is worth playing, which one assumes is the reason, then you gave them half the information and focused on the negative side.
Now you might say "well I only had the Xbox version" but as a reader I don't give two shits about that, I just don't. If the site wants to be a source for gaming reviews we can trust, the site should cover the game entirely and discuss why one might be missing out on an amazing RPG experience on the other platform.
More to the point, a game should be reviewed at least on the platform it is meant to be played on. I did not cause a stir over the Modern Warfare 2 review focusing on Xbox because that was the main platform, I am playing a port, but for the rare games that are meant for PC now-a-days, Dragon Age, Left 4 Dead, Risen, what-have-you, it makes sense to review them on the intended platform, which Destructoid does not do, you ALWAYS review on the Xbox with amazingly rare exception.
I give you credit for only listing Xbox in the review info though, hopefully metacritic will not apply this score to the PC version. Most reviews here only play the Xbox version and then apply the score to all three, which annoys me to no end.
Piranha Bytes outsourced the 360 port to a different company. This, combined with their extensive experience developing the Gothic games exclusively for PC, would tend to indicate a pretty strong preference for PC.
Don't take my word for it, here's a relevant post from PB's Art Director.
but there's no use crying over spilled milk.
This is very true.
I'm really tired of console-only gamers calling anyone who points out the benefits of a gaming PC as an elitist. Would I be an elitist if I said a Ferrari is a better car than a Honda? Would I be an elitist if I said a mansion on the beach is a better place to live than a one bedroom apartment in the ghetto?
No, I would not.
PC versions of games are better on all technical and gameplay levels, there is no denying this. Sure, we get a rare broken port like Double Agent, but 95% of the time the PC version is superior, even in the case of a straight-up console port. Now, knowing all this you can still choose to game on consoles for ease of use, lower price or more exclusives if you like, that's your decision, but that does not mean PC versions aren't superior, they are, and that does not mean console exclusives like Killzone 2 wouldn't be better on PC, because they would be.
Think of it this way: if Risen were a PS3 game and it was awesome on the PS3, then it was ported to the Xbox and was broken and crappy, would one be a PS3 elitist for saying so? I think not.
You guys need to get over this "PC elitist" thing because you sound ignorant and defensive all the time.
Why should I as a reader care about which version you got for free to review? Why does that matter to the integrity of the review one bit?
The reader does not care what you were provided or prefer to play on, the reader only cares about getting an accurate and encompassing review that covers the game.
I shouldn't focus on the port issues entirely though, as a lot of review is more about how you want the game to be more like Oblivion, which I just disagree with on a completely "port issues aside" level, to quote you from earlier. Some people want a more engaging and deep experience and some don't, and you can clearly see that when the game gets high scores some places and low scores in others. The deeper games are always divisive in review scores.
I remember when Morrowind came out I read an Xbox review for it on IGN that basically said "wow, this is a deep PC game and has no place on consoles." I wept that day (not really of course, but inside sort of, over the future of gaming I knew would be more mainstreamed).
Gee, and I always thought that an emphasis on material capital and an unexamined privileging of wealth-restrictive technologies made one a consumer elitist. I suppose I've been wrong this whole time!
If you're suggesting that I want the game to tell me exactly what to do and where to go at all times -- you're wrong. I said multiple times that I enjoyed exploring the island. But I also said that the game's broken combat kept me from doing so. One busted part of the game kept me from experiencing a far better part of the game. I literally don't know how else to say it.
And maybe the PC combat is better, or maybe it's inherently fucked up -- I don't know. But I do know that, playing Risen on the Xbox 360, the combat is detrimental to the game as a whole. I didn't review Risen on the PC, I reviewed it on the Xbox 360, and I reviewed it accordingly. I really don't know what you want from me, here.
I said at the end of the game that I was going to keep playing it. I said that there was a lot of the game that I liked -- I like the character interaction, the exploration, and the crafting mechanics. But when the combat gets in the way of those things -- even if it's because Risen 360 is a shoddy port -- I can't just ignore it because other parts of the game are good.
The Xbox version is of interest to Xbox gamers. He reviewed the Xbox version. If he reviewed the PC version, Xbox owners would not give a shit about it. It's pretty conceited to think that this review ought to cater for you, a non-360 gamer.
Given that there is such a difference between the PC version and the port, do you not think they should be reviewed separatly?
Thirdly, your defense of PC elitism is extremely arrogant and begs the question.
Fourthly, show some fucking respect.
If you disagree with the reasons backing up these perspectives, then discuss those specific reasons rather than just attacking the entire message due to a difference of opinion.
Sorry, but saying that we're stupid and buying the wrong version isn't pointing out the benefits, it's being an elitist dick. That's how PC players, from my experience, tend to be. Their arguments boil down to, 'This game is great on PC, and you're stupid if you play it elsewhere.' If the game was better on PS3, you'd only be an elitist/fanboy if you used the same argument. Pointing out that it's better on PC is fine, calling me ignorant and stupid because I choose to play on a console isn't.
Reviewers aren't obligated to review anything. The review clearly states that it's a 360 review. What the fuck are you complaining about?