King's Field artwork

King's Field Review

1994FromSoftwareGame

FromSoftware's first game is slow, dark and unforgiving, and already recognizably the studio that would make everything else.

CriticAverage
Users7.0 out of 10

Vote your grade

Category grades
CategoryCriticUsers
Difficulty to makeGood
VisualsAverage
StoryGood
GameplayAverage
OverallAverage

You move at a crawl. You swing a sword and then wait for a stamina bar to refill before you can swing it again. The dungeon does not tell you where to go, the lighting hides more than it reveals, and a skeleton around a corner can end a long unsaved stretch in three hits. Every instinct that would later define this studio is present in its debut, minus twenty years of craft. What it lacks is comfort of any kind: the frame rate is low even by the standards of 1994, the geometry is a series of brown corridors, and the combat is a matter of backing away and poking rather than anything you would call a system.

What it has is atmosphere and a total refusal to reassure you, which at the time was almost unheard of in a genre that otherwise loved automaps and quest logs. Playing it today is genuinely hard work and largely of historical interest. Playing it as an archaeological dig, knowing what eventually grows out of this soil, is a different and far more rewarding experience.

Reviewed Sep 7, 2026 · Last verified Sep 7, 2026 · How we grade

King's Field at a glance

Platforms
PlayStation
Developer
FromSoftware
Hours played
6
Year
1994

What’s your grade?

Grade by category
Difficulty to make
Visuals
Story
Gameplay

No account needed. Sign in so your grades follow you and count once. · how vote integrity works

Comments

Plain text, 500 characters. Be sharp, not cruel.

0/500

No comments yet. Have the first take.

More games reviews