The game's reception in North America was generally positive. It received an aggregate score of 78.60% on GameRankings and 77/100 on Metacritic. Many publications praised the game's battle system, with "Electronic Gaming Monthly" stating that "Grandia's semi-real-time battles are superb, offering just the right balance of strategy and visual flair, and the new aerial combos are a blast," but found the game's plot to be "fairly linear". "GamePro" similarly called the game's combat "intriguing", yet deemed the game's story to be "more clichéd and campy than epic and amazing ... The characters all fall into conveniently familiar categories and fail to attract any serious interest in their concerns or circumstances" GameSpot found the game's short length and lack of sidequests to be its low points, yet ultimately declared that "While not as stuffed with features and extra content as some of the other RPGs currently available, Grandia III still delivers an interesting (if traditional) story, fun characters, and a versatile, strategy-based battle system." 1UP.com declared that the game's story, pacing, and character development felt disjointed from one disc to another, stating that "I almost feel like I'm reviewing two games -- the first disc, which is awesome, and the second, which is ho-hum." In an article for "The New York Times", game critic Charles Herold called the game's battle system "arguably the greatest combat system of any turn-based role-playing game in existence" but found the rest of the game to be largely average, remarking that it "falls short of true greatness, not because it does anything glaringly wrong but because it doesn't do quite enough things right."