GOG.com
Donate to Codex
Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
u7buy.com

Gaming Age criticizes clicking in Blade&Sword

Click here and disable ads!

Gaming Age criticizes clicking in Blade&Sword

Review - posted by Vault Dweller on Sat 17 January 2004, 17:05:20

Tags: Blade and Sword

Gaming Age has posted a <a href=http://www.gaming-age.com/cgi-bin/reviews/review.pl?sys=pc&game=bladesword>review[/url] of Blade&Sword giving it C+. The weird part is that it says "Good" under "C+", which, I guess, is some latest gaming media trend where all games are good, but some of them are better then the other.


Game play is as basic as click, click, click. That’s right Diablo fans, your carpel tunnel syndrome may wreak its ugly head once again. Need to move about, just click. Need to kill a foe, just click. Picking up an object, just click. How about talking to an ally? That’s right friends, just click. The action, while basic, does get heated when multiple characters are attacking at once, which can make for some interesting fight sequences. You also have a few specials attacks at your disposal. Depending on how much experience you have, you can acquire special moves that will whip those baddies back to the bowels of which they came. To use these specials will take some serious thought and technique, and I have the quick and easy solution to help you use these powerful chi attacks. If you have a pen handy here we go. Choose the chi you want to use by selecting F, R, or Q…then you…click! Whew, I hope you veterans at home can handle this​
Overall, I'm not sure what to think. The guy says that visuals are not bad, mentions detailed character models, good architecture, smart AI, but complains about clicking? Well, it's a Diablo clone, duh!

Spotted at: GenGamers

There are 10 comments on Gaming Age criticizes clicking in Blade&Sword

Site hosted by Sorcerer's Place Link us!
Codex definition, a book manuscript.
eXTReMe Tracker
rpgcodex.net RSS Feed
This page was created in 0.065490961074829 seconds