Veil of Crows

About

Veil of Crows is a single player role playing game. It was developed by Kerry Fawdray and was released on October 18, 2018. It received neutral reviews from players.

"Veil of Crows" is a sandbox-style real-time strategy game set in a chaotic medieval world, allowing you to command large armies, besiege castles, and interact with other factions through trade, bribes, and extortion. The game's persistent world means that your actions will have a lasting impact even after you die or start over. The massive campaign map includes over 75 towns and villages to conquer, and epic battles can be affected by factors such as weather, geography, and unit strengths and weaknesses.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player

Skip User Reviews

50%

Audience ScoreBased on 676 reviews

gameplay12 positive mentions

story10 negative mentions

The game has a good concept and combines elements of Mount and Blade with Total War.
The developer is responsive and actively updates the game, showing dedication to improvement.
There is potential for the game to become great with further development and community support.

The game is unfinished and has been abandoned by the developer, leading to many bugs and lack of updates.
The user interface is clunky and difficult to navigate, making gameplay frustrating.
Many players report crashes and performance issues, especially during battles and sieges.

gameplay
72 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
17%
75%
8%
The gameplay has received mixed reviews, with many players criticizing its lack of polish, clunky mechanics, and a confusing interface, particularly in its early access state. While some appreciate the nostalgic elements and potential for depth, others find it too similar to existing titles like "Mount & Blade," leading to a sense of repetitiveness and frustration with game-breaking mechanics. Overall, the game shows promise but requires significant improvements and additional content to enhance the player experience.
- “The basic idea of gameplay is enjoyable, although probably biased from M&B nostalgia for me.”
- “The fighting mechanics both in skirmishes and sieges are wonderful, although a bit clunky control-wise.”
- “So far I am loving this game; the gameplay is nice and easy to learn but has a lot of depth. The dev team seems quite interested in the community and responsive to questions and lots of updates. I look forward to spending many hours in this game.”
- “Could be much better, but as it is; I just wasted 10 bucks, and spent too much time through the tutorial and beginning gameplay to figure out it wasn't worth it and that I want a refund.”
- “Game looks like it's still from the year 2000, so it wouldn't hurt to give it another year of work to make sure the gameplay delivers.”
- “A lot of ambitious ideas, but the mechanics just aren't there to even play a battle.”
story
58 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
10%
73%
17%
The game's story is largely criticized for being minimal or non-existent, with many players noting that it feels like a series of grindy, repetitive missions lacking depth or narrative engagement. Users express frustration over the absence of a coherent storyline, which detracts from the role-playing experience, and highlight issues with quest design that make progression difficult and unfulfilling. Overall, the consensus is that the game requires significant improvements in storytelling and quest structure to enhance player immersion and enjoyment.
- “Epic story.”
- “Having played an incredible amount of tabletop roleplay games where a single story can take 1-3 real life years to complete.”
- “The quests are simple, but much more enjoyable than the ones from Mount and Blade.”
- “This game has no story.”
- “There isn't enough there in terms of roleplay or story, or diplomacy (the last of which is essentially a single skill on your character and a percentage chance for the target to accept a bribe or trade).”
- “Omg it is so basic, the combat, the characters, the UI, gets occasional big FPS drops, there is no storyline so you have to make one on your own which this game cannot offer you since the content for stories is too little... all this was discovered in barely a few hours.”
graphics
50 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
16%
56%
28%
The graphics of the game have received largely negative feedback, with many users citing issues such as choppy visuals, poor pathfinding, and a cluttered overworld map that detracts from gameplay. While some players appreciate the game's authentic medieval aesthetic, the overall consensus is that the graphics are outdated and in need of significant improvement. Despite these shortcomings, many find the gameplay enjoyable, indicating that graphics are not the primary concern for all players.
- “The graphics are awesome; the look is authentic, the gameplay is fun, and the game is an on-paper winner.”
- “The gory, yet simple graphics perfectly portray the medieval setting this game recreates.”
- “Could use a little UI and graphical update, but the game is still very enjoyable!”
- “The overworld maps are boring and cluttered with nonsensical, moving and waving trees that make it look like a bad pop-up book, and take up too much VRAM for nothing; while the rest of the world appears graphically flat.”
- “I can swallow bad graphics no problem, but the map is very hard to read and tiring to look at or even move around it; this I can't overlook.”
- “Graphics are from the 1990's (overall map at least); combat looks fun - but I came here for the whole 'start with nothing - lead an army' - great - but randomness - lack of easy work initially - unlucky chance encounters.”
stability
44 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game is widely criticized for its instability, with numerous reports of bugs, glitches, and performance issues that hinder gameplay. Many users describe it as a "buggy mess" that feels unfinished and in need of significant polishing, particularly in its user interface and mechanics. While some see potential in the game, they recommend waiting for further updates before investing, as it currently struggles to deliver a smooth experience.
- “Many of the features already in the game are buggy and seem to have a habit of working fine then not working at all.”
- “The game in its current state is buggy and unfinished.”
- “Waaay too buggy to be a full game.”
optimization
14 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
29%
42%
29%
Overall, the game suffers from significant optimization issues, including performance stuttering and overly fast AI movements that detract from the gameplay experience. While some users note improvements in performance, many express a desire for further optimizations and bug fixes before they can fully enjoy the game.
- “Speaking of troops, the game's performance has tenfold improved.”
- “Of course, bug fixes, UI improvements, balance adjustments, and optimizations go without saying.”
- “I think it's better than Epic Battle Simulator; only the performance and crashes need to be fixed.”
- “It is a really good game, but it lacks optimization.”
- “Although they need to slow the game down, the AI, once set to attack, tends to sprint and move too quickly to enjoy anything, also super stuttering.”
- “(Of course, bug fixes, UI, balances, and optimizations go without saying.)”
replayability
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
80%
20%
Overall, users highlight that the game offers significant replayability, with some describing it as "infinitely replayable" and noting that it provides more fun and replay value than many other RTS titles. Despite some players expressing a desire for further improvements, the game's current state is still considered enjoyable and worth purchasing.
- “Infinitely replayable.”
- “Even in its current state, it's worth buying and is great fun with decent replayability.”
- “Veil of Crows is modestly priced and already has more fun and replayability than many RTS games.”
music
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The music in the early access game is noted as an area that could benefit from improvement, but it contributes to the overall enjoyable and addictive gameplay experience.
grinding
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be unbalanced and tedious, with troop creation, resource farming, and upgrades feeling sluggish. Additionally, the RPG missions are criticized for being overly repetitive and lacking in narrative depth, contributing to a monotonous gameplay experience.
- “The troop creation/recruitment, resource farming, and upgrades seem to be unbalanced and sluggish.”
- “All of the RPG-type missions offered are grindy repeatable missions; there is almost no story.”
- “The troop creation/recruitment, resource farming, and upgrades seem to be unbalanced and sluggish.”
humor
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is described as mildly hilarious, particularly in moments where characters react comically to chaotic situations, such as engineers facing unexpected obstacles. However, some players note that these humorous elements can disrupt strategic gameplay. Overall, while the game is entertaining, it is still in early access and has room for improvement.
- “It is mildly hilarious to watch 8 engineers run across a highly detailed field where men take arrows to the face (no joke) only to reach a wall and stand there going 'oh s@&t', but it sort of ruined my strategy.”
monetization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The monetization aspect of the game has received mixed feedback, with players feeling that the battles do not live up to the advertised epic experience, which may affect their overall enjoyment and willingness to invest further.