God of War: Ragnarok

The majority of critics praised God of War: Ragnarok for its emotionally resonant storytelling, character development, and thematic depth. Shacknews lauded the narrative as “an absolute master class in storytelling,” emphasizing its grounded characters and heartfelt moments, while We Got This Covered highlighted its exploration of “generational abuse, trauma, and breaking the cycle of violence” with nuance. The evolving father-son relationship between Kratos and Atreus was a standout element, with GamingBolt noting its focus on grief and personal growth, and Gamer.no praising its “nuanced and believable” dynamic. Themes of Norse mythology, fate, and familial conflict were consistently celebrated, as seen in the praise from COGconnected for its “cinematic” storytelling rooted in mythological tradition. Critics like IGN and GameSkinny also noted the game’s expansion of narrative scope, with IGN calling it an “expansive story that delves deep into themes of destiny,” and GameRevolution highlighting its “suitably epic” scale and expanded cast. However, several critics pointed to pacing issues, structural inconsistencies, and moments where gameplay felt disconnected from the narrative. TheGamer criticized the plot as “meandering” and lacking cohesion, while Games.cz noted “occasional inconsistencies and excessive melodrama.” Digitally Downloaded highlighted a “tonal dissonance” between character-driven moments and gameplay mechanics, particularly with Atreus’ role as a “talking quest marker.” GamingBolt and GamesRadar+ mentioned minor pacing hiccups in the middle act, and KeenGamer felt the ending was “rushed.” Additionally, some critics, like 4P.de, noted that the story’s complexity required prior knowledge of the series, and Easy Allies observed that “some instances can drag on” as the plot shuffled pieces toward its climax. These critiques, while significant, were often framed as minor flaws in an otherwise strong narrative. Despite these criticisms, the overall consensus among critics was overwhelmingly positive, with many calling Ragnarok one of the best stories in gaming. Critics like We Got This Covered and Attack of the Fanboy celebrated its “unparalleled storytelling” and innovative narrative perspectives, while Hardcore Gamer praised its “near pitch-perfect” pacing and satisfying conclusion. Even reviewers who noted flaws acknowledged the game’s emotional weight and thematic ambition, with Hobby Consolas calling it a “violent and tragic” tale that “shakes the player.” The balance of praise for character depth, mythological richness, and emotional resonance far outweighed the critiques, cementing Ragnarok as a narrative triumph in the series’ legacy.

The gameplay of God of War: Ragnarok received widespread praise for its refined combat mechanics, expanded customization, and immersive exploration. Critics highlighted the game’s evolution from its predecessor, with improved Variety in combat options, such as the early access to the Blades of Chaos and enhanced weapon versatility (GamesBeat, COGconnected). The combat system was lauded for its fluidity, tactical depth, and dynamic encounters, with reviewers like The Independent noting the satisfying blend of close-range strikes and ranged attacks, while Player 2 praised Kratos’ expanded arsenal and the strategic importance of parrying. Exploration also saw significant improvements, with AusGamers and GamePro Germany commending the game’s vast, newly accessible realms and intricate environmental puzzles. The skill tree and gear customization allowed for personalized playstyles, as noted by GameSpot and COGconnected, while Destructoid highlighted the engaging side quests that enriched the narrative and world-building. Despite these strengths, several critics pointed to recurring issues that detracted from the experience. A common critique was the lack of innovation in core mechanics, with CD-Action and GamesBeat noting that the gameplay felt largely unchanged from the 2018 title, relying on familiar systems without significant evolution. Repetitiveness in combat and level design was another concern, as TrueGaming and Gamer.nl observed that some encounters and puzzles felt formulaic or recycled. Technical issues also arose, such as AusGamers’ frustration with the flawed evade/block system and GamersRD’s struggles with mouse-and-keyboard controls due to confusing keybinds. Additionally, Gamer.nl and GameSkinny criticized the game’s linear structure and occasional use of invisible barriers, while Launcher (The Washington Post) noted that some combat sequences felt overly long or tedious despite their spectacle. Overall, the consensus among critics was overwhelmingly positive, with most acknowledging Ragnarok as a strong, polished continuation of the God of War saga. While some pointed to minor flaws—such as repetitive elements or technical hiccups—the majority emphasized its strengths in combat Variety, exploration, and narrative depth. Reviewers like GameSpot, Destructoid, and Player 2 highlighted the game’s ability to balance intense action with strategic customization, while COGconnected and The Independent praised its cinematic quality and engaging world-building. Even critics who noted shortcomings, such as GamesBeat and CD-Action, acknowledged that these issues did not overshadow the game’s overall excellence. The majority of reviewers agreed that Ragnarok delivered a compelling, immersive experience that elevated the series while staying true to its roots.

The majority of critics lauded God of War: Ragnarok for its breathtaking visuals and meticulous design, with many hailing it as a technical and artistic triumph. The game’s environments were frequently described as “stunning,” with GamesHub praising its “towering beasts and vast landscapes” that evoke awe, while T3 highlighted the “luscious greens of Vanaheim” and “glistening yellows of Jötunheim” as exemplars of its immersive world-building. The single-camera technique, a hallmark of the series, was celebrated for enhancing cinematic immersion, with Gamersky noting how it “enhances the immersive experience” and Gamepressure commending the “realistic facial expressions” in cutscenes that rival film quality. Siliconera and VGC emphasized the game’s “epic art direction” and “photorealistic snow,” while Digital Chumps (PC) praised ray tracing and lighting effects. Even critics like IGN and Telegraph acknowledged the “gorgeous realms” and “absurd expense” in production, underscoring a near-universal consensus on its visual grandeur. Despite these accolades, some critiques pointed to minor shortcomings. PC Invasion noted that the PC port’s performance issues detracted from the experience, while Metro GameCentral criticized the “uninteractive and artificial” worlds, arguing that locations felt overfamiliar and lacked depth. Push Square suggested the game’s visuals were more a product of “sublime art direction” than technical innovation, citing its cross-gen nature as a limitation. Gamersky acknowledged that some areas “may feel familiar” to fans of previous entries, and SECTOR.sk felt enemy Variety could have been improved. Additionally, App Trigger mentioned early graphical clipping issues that were later patched, though this was a minor concern compared to the overall praise. These critiques, while valid, did not overshadow the game’s visual strengths. The overwhelming consensus among critics is that God of War: Ragnarok represents a masterclass in graphics and visual design, with only minor reservations. While some noted technical limitations or repetitive elements, the majority agreed it set a new benchmark for the series and the medium. GamesHub called it “stunning,” T3 declared it “gorgeous” and “one of the most beautiful experiences,” and Finger Guns hailed it as a “beautifully designed and epic adventure game.” Even critics who pointed to cross-gen compromises, like Hardcore Gamer, acknowledged its superiority over predecessors and competitors. With its attention to detail, cinematic framing, and lush environments, Ragnarok cemented itself as a visual masterpiece, proving that the team at Santa Monica Studio has once again raised the bar for storytelling through artistry.

The majority of critics praised the sound design and music of God of War: Ragnarok as exceptional, highlighting its immersive and emotionally resonant qualities. Bear McCreary’s orchestral score was frequently lauded for its ability to blend epic grandeur with intimate moments, with reviewers like Dexerto calling it “the composer’s best work yet” and noting how it elevated key scenes to “goosebumps-inducing levels.” The use of 3D audio and DualSense integration also stood out, with Vgames and Attack of the Fanboy emphasizing how haptic feedback and spatial sound enhanced immersion. Voice acting received widespread acclaim, particularly for Christopher Judge’s portrayal of Kratos, whose “commanding voice work” (per Variety) balanced gravitas and tenderness, while CGMagazine and Gamepressure highlighted the emotional depth of the cast, including Ryan Hurst as Thor and Richard Schiff as Odin. The soundtrack’s dynamic range—epic during battles and subtle in quieter moments—was a recurring theme, with Meristation noting how “epic and warlike melodies” matched the game’s intensity. While most critiques were positive, some minor concerns emerged. Gaming Age criticized the voice acting of supporting characters, though they praised Christopher Judge’s performance as Kratos. Additionally, Gamepressure mentioned issues with the PS4 version’s sound, and Impulsegamer noted that audio settings required adjustment for optimal clarity, albeit with “thoughtful” design choices. A few reviewers, like IGN Italia, acknowledged that localization efforts were “acceptable but not perfect,” though this was a minor point in an otherwise glowing assessment. These critiques were overshadowed by the overwhelming consensus on the game’s auditory strengths. The overall consensus among critics is overwhelmingly positive, with nearly all highlighting the sound design and music as standout elements. IGN, Dexerto, and GameSkinny praised the soundtrack’s emotional impact and technical execution, while Shacknews called it “of mythological proportions.” The voice acting, particularly the performances of Kratos and Atreus, was deemed “seamless” (per GameByte) and “two of the best acting performances of the generation” (per GameSkinny). Even critics who mentioned minor flaws acknowledged the game’s technical and artistic achievements, reinforcing that Ragnarok’s audio design and score were pivotal to its success. The combination of McCreary’s music, stellar voice work, and innovative use of 3D audio created a cohesive and immersive experience that resonated with both fans and critics alike.

The voice acting in God of War: Ragnarok received widespread acclaim from critics, with many highlighting its emotional depth, nuanced performances, and ability to elevate the game’s narrative. Reviewers consistently praised the vocal work of main characters like Kratos and Atreus, with Christopher Judge and Sunny Suljic receiving particular acclaim for their mature and dynamic portrayals. Slant Magazine noted Richard Schiff’s “razor-sharp shrewdness” as Odin and Ryan Hurst’s “all-too-believable surliness” as Thor, while GamesHub celebrated the “comical odd couple” of Brok and Sindri, as well as Mimir’s blend of gravity and levity. The relationship between Kratos and Atreus was highlighted as a standout, with Hobby Consolas praising the tension and emotional resonance captured through their dialogue. Many critics, including IGN Spain and Eurogamer Italy, emphasized the game’s balance of drama and humor, while Comicbook.com called the performances “downright incredible,” particularly lauding Alastair Duncan’s portrayal of Mimir and Leya DeLeon Hayes’ nuanced take on Angrboda. The voice acting was frequently described as a cornerstone of the game’s storytelling, with VideoGamer calling it a “class-act” and Finger Guns noting it set a new standard for dialogue and acting in games. While the majority of reviews were overwhelmingly positive, some critics pointed to minor flaws or subjective issues. Metro GameCentral criticized the “bizarre choices in terms of accents,” while Gaming Age noted that while Kratos’ voice was praised, other characters’ performances felt “grating” and mismatched for their roles. MGG mentioned that the French localization was generally excellent but highlighted a shortcoming in Odin’s voice actor, and The Enemy described the Portuguese dialogue as “acceptable but not perfect.” Additionally, TheSixthAxis observed that some companion characters’ banter felt irritating compared to Kratos’ blunt delivery. These critiques were relatively isolated, often focusing on specific localization choices or character interpretations rather than overarching quality issues. Despite these points, they did not detract from the general consensus that the voice acting was a major strength of the game. The overall consensus among critics was that God of War: Ragnarok’s voice acting was exceptional, with only minor criticisms overshadowed by widespread praise. The performances of key characters like Kratos, Atreus, Odin, and Thor were repeatedly highlighted as transformative, with Game Informer calling the characterizations “particularly fantastic” and Press Start Australia noting the cast felt “alive and larger-than-life.” Even critics who pointed to isolated issues, such as Gaming Age or Metro GameCentral, acknowledged the game’s broader success in delivering compelling vocal work. The majority of reviews, including those from IGN Adria, COGconnected, and Worth Playing, emphasized that the voice acting significantly contributed to the game’s emotional depth and character development. This strong critical reception underscores Ragnarok’s achievement in making its mythic figures feel human, with Siliconera noting that “each character becomes rich and deep,” and GameSkinny calling it “two of the best acting performances of the generation.” The voice acting was consistently seen as a defining element of the game’s success.

The technical performance of God of War: Ragnarok varies significantly across platforms, with notable strengths on both PC and PS5. On PC, critics like Vandal praised the game’s excellent performance on high-end systems, achieving 4K at high frame rates, while Gaming Nexus highlighted consistent frame rates and stability despite concerns about PSN requirements. For PS5, multiple reviewers, including Gfinity and Impulsegamer, lauded its smooth gameplay, with Gfinity noting flawless animation and Impulsegamer stating no issues during playthroughs. The PS5 version also benefits from accessibility features (e.g., 70+ options) and visual modes like 120fps, as noted by IGN France and T3. On PS4, the game runs smoothly with minimal bugs, as highlighted by Shindig, though some critics like Digital Trends felt it retained a “PS4 feel” despite PS5 hardware. Overall, both platforms received praise for polish, but PC faced optimization challenges, while PS5’s next-gen features were underutilized by some. However, technical issues marred the experience on certain platforms. On PC, PC Invasion and Hardcore Gamer criticized the port for poor optimization, requiring high-end hardware and causing crashes or memory leaks at launch. GamingTrend noted graphical glitches on Steam Deck, while Multiplayer.it mentioned VRAM management problems and DualSense stability issues. For PS5, critics like GamingTrend and ZTGD pointed to bugs such as empty screens during lore entries, stuck animations, and slow loading times despite the console’s capabilities. Digital Trends and Hobby Consolas observed that the game felt more like a PS4 title, with hidden loading screens and limited use of PS5 features like VRR or 3D audio. While some reviewers, like Gamer.nl and Areajugones, praised minimal bugs, others, including TierraGamer, noted camera issues during crowded battles. These flaws, though varied in severity, highlighted inconsistencies in technical execution across platforms. The overall consensus among critics is that God of War: Ragnarok delivers strong technical performance on both PC and PS5, albeit with platform-specific caveats. On PS5, the game’s polish and accessibility options were widely praised, with reviewers like Gfinity and T3 calling it one of the most refined experiences of 2022. However, its reliance on PS4-era design limited its ability to fully leverage next-gen hardware. On PC, while some critics (e.g., Vandal, Gaming Nexus) celebrated smooth performance and optimization, others (e.g., PC Invasion, Hardcore Gamer) criticized the port’s instability and high system requirements. Despite these issues, most reviewers agreed that the game’s technical shortcomings were overshadowed by its gameplay and narrative strengths. The mixed reception underscores a broader trend: while Ragnarok is technically solid overall, it reflects the challenges of balancing cross-platform consistency with next-gen innovation.

The critics overwhelmingly praise God of War: Ragnarok for its substantial replay value, driven by its expansive content and dynamic gameplay systems. Many highlight the game’s lengthy single-player campaign, with Areajugones noting 50 hours to complete the main story and side quests, while PlayStation Universe estimates 40–50 hours without exhaustive side content. The game’s modular design allows for personalization through armor, runes, shields, and weapon skills (IGN Adria), enabling players to experiment with different playstyles. Post-game content is also a standout feature: DualShockers emphasizes the Metroidvania-style exploration of locked areas, while Metro GameCentral and Trusted Reviews praise the "mountain of post-game content" and 70-hour potential for completists. The Valhalla DLC (Hardcore Gamer, Worth Playing) adds roguelike mechanics that encourage experimentation, further enhancing replayability. Additionally, the game’s rich lore and side quests—described as "deeply rooted in the Norse pantheon" (Screen Rant) and "worth completing for their rewards" (Gamepressure)—create a sense of discovery that invites multiple playthroughs. However, several critics point to elements that could diminish replay value. CD-Action notes the repetitive nature of gameplay and exploration, while Digitally Downloaded criticizes the restrictive puzzle design, which demands specific solutions and frustrates exploration. New Game Network and Multiplayer.it highlight the slow pacing, with players feeling compelled to complete numerous activities that can drag the experience. The game’s linear structure, despite its open-world elements, is seen as a drawback by some: Digitally Downloaded describes it as "popcorn entertainment" with a formulaic rhythm of puzzle-combat-narrative segments, and Hardcore Gamer argues that the main campaign’s repetition limits overall replayability. Additionally, while side quests are praised for their depth (Shindig, GameSpot), others suggest they may feel like distractions if not aligned with player interests. The consensus among critics is that God of War: Ragnarok offers a highly replayable experience despite its flaws. While some critiques about repetition and pacing exist, the game’s vast content, customization options, and post-game challenges (e.g., Valhalla DLC, Metroidvania-style exploration) create a compelling reason to revisit. Critics like DualShockers and IGN Adria emphasize how the game’s design encourages multiple playstyles and builds, while others, such as Gamepressure and Trusted Reviews, highlight its ability to keep players engaged for dozens of hours. Even with limitations in areas like puzzle design or pacing, the overall sentiment leans positive: Ragnarok is seen as a richly layered adventure that rewards dedication, with many critics agreeing it “offers lots of hours of enjoyment” (Gaming Age) and “plenty to do throughout the game” (God is a Geek). The combination of narrative depth, mechanical Variety, and optional content ensures its replay value remains strong.