Compare Saros vs Avowed

Reviewers praised Saros for broad accessibility and difficulty-tuning options, including modifiers, visual recoloring, remapping, and ways to soften or intensify challenge.

Reviewers noted useful accessibility and comfort controls such as camera, subtitle, difficulty, and arachnophobia-related options, though colorblind support was called out as missing.

One reviewer specifically framed Avowed as more appropriate for older teens and adults because of its complex themes and mature material.

Enemy AI was considered serviceable but not especially smart; later impressions suggested fights remain engaging without feeling brain-dead.

Aiming was generally considered forgiving and readable thanks to auto-aim and tracking, though some no-auto-aim weapons were harder to master.

Aiming and first-person spell placement drew criticism when ground-targeted abilities were hard to place precisely.

Animation comments were mostly negative, focused on stiff dialogue animation and odd or weak face animation outside stronger cinematic moments.

Animation feedback was mixed, with stiff NPCs and less impressive presentation keeping the game from feeling fully modern.

Art direction was a clear strength, with reviewers highlighting Carcosa’s strong, alien visual identity and memorable environmental design.

Most reviewers praised the bold, colorful, alien fantasy art direction, though a few disliked the cartoony look or felt presentation was uneven.

Reviewers repeatedly praised the unnerving, dread-soaked atmosphere, even when they disagreed about the story itself.

The Living Lands’ vivid tone, music, and dreamlike spaces were repeatedly praised for creating a distinctive atmosphere.

Bosses were widely admired for spectacle, challenge, and memorability, though a few reviewers found some fights long or uneven.

Boss design was criticized as disappointing, with bosses feeling like tougher versions of regular enemies rather than unique encounters.

Bug reports varied widely: some reviewers found almost none, while others hit quest bugs, map-edge bugs, or issues that required reloads.

Camera controls were specifically praised as quick enough for combat without becoming disorienting.

Camera-related options were appreciated, especially the ability to adjust head bob and camera shake for comfort.

Character creation was generally praised as solid or deep, with later updates adding more races and appearance options.

Arjun’s arc drew praise where reviewers felt his development became darker, more complex, and captivating.

Character development split reviewers: some found companions distinct and engaging, while others thought characters were bland or hard to care about.

The cast received mixed reactions, with some reviews praising performances while others wanted more depth beyond Arjun.

The companion roster was often seen as small or limited, though some reviewers still liked the four supporting characters.

Saros’ checkpoint-like structure and biome restart options were praised for reducing repetition and respecting time.

Build and class flexibility was praised because Avowed lets players mix archetypes freely, though balance sometimes favored magic or specific styles.

Combat was the strongest consensus point, described as thrilling, precise, tactile, and among Housemarque’s best work.

Combat was one of the most consistently praised elements, especially magic, responsiveness, and build variety, despite repetition and gear-gating complaints.

Companion combat AI was mixed: some found companions self-sufficient or improved by patches, while others called them weak or unnecessary in fights.

Several reviews found the game rich in sections, weapons, collectibles, and sights, though the content variety was usually discussed through exploration and spectacle.

Reviewers liked the dense zones and amount of side content, although some felt the scope was restrained rather than sprawling.

Controls were heavily praised for responsiveness, tactile feel, and precise movement/shooting, with only rare complaints about input conflicts.

Controls and combat feel were commonly praised for responsiveness, impact, and keybind flexibility, with a few targeting frustrations.

The core loop was usually seen as compelling and satisfying, though Polygon felt progression systems weakened the roguelike loop.

The core loop was divisive: strong combat and exploration were often undermined for some reviewers by gear-tier repetition and open-zone structure.

Crafting was mixed to negative, with several reviewers calling it threadbare, expensive, or too tied to gear-tier progression.

Crash stability varied by platform and version: some reviewers reported no crashes, while another had severe startup crashes before fixes.

Dialogue quality was mixed to weak, with several reviewers noting stilted conversations, unnatural backlog delivery, or long quiet stretches.

Dialogue quality ranged from standout and well acted to overly wordy, forced, or limited in the options it offered.

Difficulty balance split reviewers: many called it tough but fair and customizable, while some felt ganks, repetition, or modifiers could undermine balance.

Difficulty balance was one of the most debated areas, with some finding it fair and flexible and others criticizing gear checks, sponginess, or uneven scaling.

Resource balance drew limited but mixed evidence, with one review noting balance concerns and another criticizing excess currency gains.

Resource balance divided reviewers: some liked the meaningful economy, while others felt crafting materials and upgrade resources were too scarce.

Emotional impact was mixed, with some reviewers admiring ideas but others saying the narrative and characters did not fully move them.

Emotional impact came mostly from moral choices, consequences, and companion moments, though some endings or fallout felt muted to critics.

Endgame content was a limited concern, with one reviewer specifically wishing for a dedicated post-game activity.

Endgame content was criticized because the original experience did not allow continued post-story play and lacked New Game Plus at launch.

Enemy variety was praised for diverse, escalating, and biome-changing threats that keep combat fresh.

Enemy variety was a recurring concern; many reviewers felt the same bears, spiders, skeletons, and humanoids appeared too often.

Environmental detail was a frequent highlight, with reviewers praising Carcosa’s biomes, architecture, and alien spaces.

Environmental detail was strongly praised through dense secrets, vistas, caves, and handcrafted spaces, even by some otherwise mixed reviewers.

Exploration was praised for hidden paths, secrets, and optional areas that reward revisiting biomes.

Exploration was one of the strongest consensus positives, with dense maps, secrets, vertical paths, and constant rewards keeping reviewers engaged.

Facial animations were a repeated weakness, especially outside cutscenes where faces could not match the vocal performances.

Facial animations were criticized in later impressions as not matching next-generation expectations.

Reviewers generally felt Saros honors Housemarque and Returnal’s lineage while refining or expanding the studio’s formula.

Returning Eora fans often felt Avowed was faithful to the Pillars of Eternity world, while still accessible to newcomers.

Fast travel and biome teleporting were widely praised as major quality-of-life improvements that reduce tedium.

Fast travel was viewed as convenient and generous, making it easy to revisit areas without friction.

Frame rate was generally strong, with most reviewers reporting near-locked or rock-solid 60fps and only occasional dips.

Frame-rate stability varied: some reviewers saw stable performance, while others reported hitches, drops, screen tearing, or stuttering.

Fun factor was very high, with reviewers repeatedly describing the act of playing, replaying, and mastering Saros as joyful or addictive.

Fun factor leaned positive overall, especially for combat and exploration, though some reviewers found the experience merely solid or underwhelming.

Gameplay mechanics, especially the shield, parry, eclipse, and modifier systems, were praised, though one review felt the systems could overprotect players.

Gameplay mechanics were generally praised as streamlined and flexible, but a few reviewers felt RPG systems lacked depth or reactivity.

Graphics quality was praised across reviews for visual flair, PS5 showcase value, and striking Unreal Engine 5 presentation.

Graphics quality was divisive but often positive, with praise for stunning vistas and vivid visuals alongside criticism of poor or compromised visuals on some platforms.

Grind and repetition drew mixed-to-negative comments, especially around repeated boss attempts and artifact droughts.

Grind level was a common complaint tied to gear upgrades, resource hunting, and spongy combat loops.

Handheld or remote play suitability had limited evidence, but one reviewer said it looked and played beautifully on PlayStation Portal.

Steam Deck suitability was considered playable and verified, but the visual tradeoff was significant.

DualSense haptics and adaptive triggers were a standout, repeatedly praised as tactile, innovative, and deeply integrated.

Haptic support was platform-dependent: one PS5 review praised DualSense vibration, while another noted missing haptic and trigger use.

Horror tension was supported through praise for dread, anxiety, cosmic horror, and the unsettling eclipse-driven world.

HUD/readability comments were positive but limited, emphasizing that the intense spectacle remained coherent and not visually confusing.

HUD clarity improved through options to reduce clutter, adjust opacity, and toggle display elements.

Immersion was praised through tactile feedback, 3D audio, and audiovisual design that pulled reviewers into Carcosa.

Immersion was helped by dense worldbuilding and atmosphere but hurt for some by static NPCs and limited world reactivity.

Innovation centered on the shield, bullet-as-resource design, haptic implementation, and a more flexible challenge structure.

Innovation was usually described as limited; reviewers saw Avowed as confident and enjoyable rather than genre-changing.

The learning curve was approachable for some but still initially demanding, with trial-and-error teaching and a tough early adjustment.

Learning support was helped by reference and lore systems that made Eora’s terminology easier to understand.

Level design was strongly praised for handcrafted chunks, biome structure, combat spaces, and a balance between freshness and mastery.

Level design was praised for verticality, density, handcrafted routes, and spaces that felt larger than their footprint.

Post-launch support was viewed positively, with free updates improving stability, customization, build options, and quality-of-life features.

Load times had limited but strong evidence, with Digital Foundry praising nearly instant transitions.

Loot drew mixed feedback: some liked risky artifacts and weapon discovery, while others disliked artifact droughts or limited replacement control.

Loot opinions were mixed: unique items and progression could be satisfying, but many chests and rewards felt predictable or unexciting.

Lore depth was praised where reviewers enjoyed logs, mysteries, and hidden material that encouraged deeper digging.

Lore depth was consistently praised, especially the in-game books, history, politics, and reference systems that made Eora feel rich.

Navigation drew criticism from one reviewer who found objective direction poor despite liking the map.

Map and navigation design was mixed, with missing custom markers criticized before later updates added them.

Menu usability had limited negative evidence, focused on hidden information and unclear equipment-screen navigation.

Menu and ability-wheel usability was mixed; some quality-of-life systems helped, but radial wheels and limited hotkeys disrupted combat for others.

Optional challenge-space design was praised as brutal but rewarding.

Mission design drew criticism when quests felt repetitive, fetchy, or like back-and-forth errands, though some standout missions remained.

Movement feel was praised as smooth, nimble, precise, and joyful across several reviews.

Movement feel and parkour were strongly praised for making exploration fluid, vertical, and enjoyable.

Narrative quality was the most mixed major attribute, ranging from gripping and coherent to underdeveloped, opaque, or overambitious.

Narrative quality was usually a strength thanks to mystery, choices, and world stakes, but some reviewers found the main plot predictable or underwhelming.

Onboarding was mixed: some reviewers said mechanics ramped up well, while one felt the many systems were poorly communicated.

Onboarding was praised when it taught by doing, though lore-heavy openings could feel steep for newcomers.

Open-zone design split reviewers: many liked curated, dense hubs, while others found the world restrictive, lifeless, or not interactive enough.

Originality was mixed, with praise for bold changes and criticism that Saros repeats Returnal-like beats with minimal variation.

Originality was limited; reviewers often described Avowed as familiar comfort-food fantasy rather than a bold genre evolution.

Pacing drew mixed responses, from tighter run pacing to complaints that story, repetition, or traversal could drag.

Pacing was mixed, with slow starts, downtime, filler quests, and late-game repetition weighing against an otherwise easy-to-follow story.

Performance optimization was praised overall, especially on PS5/PS5 Pro, with only minor dips or loading-related hitches noted.

Performance optimization varied sharply across versions, from stable and improved after patches to demanding, stuttery, or poorly optimized on some PCs.

Platform-specific support was praised through PS5 showcase features, Pro upscaling, DualSense use, and 3D audio.

Platform-specific support was praised for PS5 performance modes, Sony-platform feel, and PC features such as DLSS.

Platforming precision had limited but positive evidence around precise jumping, dodging, and reduced geometry snagging.

Platforming precision was a pleasant surprise, with simple mantling and vertical puzzles adding a welcome exploration layer.

Polish was praised frequently, with reviewers calling Saros smooth, refined, and consistently excellent.

Polish improved over time but remained uneven, with reviewers citing jank, lack of gloss, or presentation limits alongside strong craftsmanship.

Progression was usually praised for meaningful permanent upgrades, though one reviewer felt it overemphasized numbers over skill.

Progression systems were divisive: some liked flexible builds and added points, while others found midgame growth stagnant or too gear-dependent.

Protagonist appeal was mixed: several reviewers found Arjun compelling or well-acted, while one found him unpleasant by design.

Puzzles were generally light but appreciated when they used environmental elements, timing, and exploration paths.

Quest design ranged from excellent side stories and meaningful follow-ups to fetchy, inconsistent, or repetitive tasks.

Replay value was strong, with reviewers saying they wanted to dive back in or keep running even after credits.

Replay value improved with choices and post-launch New Game Plus, though some reviewers felt repeated runs changed too little.

Sandbox freedom was limited compared with full open-world RPGs, though some reviewers still appreciated freedom in story choices or builds.

Save/run continuation quality was praised via suspend, leave-and-return, and day-one roguelite quality-of-life comments.

Save reliability was a concern for at least one reviewer who needed more careful saving because of bugs.

Side character depth was a common weakness, with reviewers describing the supporting cast as shallow, disposable, or stock.

Side characters and companions were highly divisive: some found them memorable and heartfelt, while others thought they were shallow or uninspired.

Skill-tree depth was mixed, from exhaustive and satisfying to more of a limited trunk than a deep build system.

Skill trees were praised for flexibility but criticized by others as simple, shallow, or uneven across archetypes.

Sound design and 3D audio were praised for intensity, dread, positional clarity, and haunting effects.

Sound design was praised for impactful effects, combat feedback, and strong weapon audio.

The soundtrack was praised for oppressive, unnerving, and complex music that supports Carcosa’s tone.

Soundtrack reception was generally positive but often stopped short of calling the music unforgettable.

Stealth was criticized as underdeveloped or nearly useless, with little support for stealth-focused play.

Tutorial quality had limited but positive evidence, with reviewers noting trial-and-error teaching and encounter design that prepares players for bosses.

The tutorial was praised for teaching systems naturally and creating meaningful choices early.

The upgrade system was praised for making attempts feel worthwhile and improving approachability.

Upgrade systems were sharply divisive, with some liking gear longevity and many others criticizing tiers, scarcity, or number-go-up design.

User interface design had limited mixed evidence, with one reviewer finding it good enough but imperfect.

UI options such as text sizing and subtitles were appreciated as useful interface support.

Value for money had limited but explicit support from one reviewer who said they would pay full price.

Value for money was mixed: reviewers praised Game Pass or lower pricing but questioned the original premium price for the scope.

Visual effects were a major highlight, especially the particle-heavy combat fireworks and colorful VFX.

Visual effects, especially magic, were repeatedly praised for impact, color, and satisfying feedback.

Voice acting was widely praised, especially Rahul Kohli’s performance, with the broader cast also receiving positive notes.

Voice acting was mostly praised as strong or outstanding, though one reviewer found performances unable to save weaker writing.

Weapon balance was mostly positive for variety and viability, though some weapons or no-autohit variants frustrated reviewers.

Weapon balance and variety were mostly praised for experimentation and flexible loadouts, but some reviewers felt magic outclassed melee or guns.

World-building was praised through Carcosa’s mysteries, logs, lore, and thematic environmental storytelling.

World-building was one of Avowed’s clearest strengths, especially its politics, cultures, history, and Eora continuity.

World interactivity had limited evidence, mostly around movement-reactive effects and environmental destruction.

World interactivity was one of the most common criticisms, with many reviewers finding NPCs, theft, objects, and systems too static.

Writing quality was mixed, with praise for logs and media-literate storytelling but criticism of hollow or unclear themes.

Writing quality was widely praised for lore, companion dialogue, and sharp prose, but a minority found it wordy, pretentious, or mid.