Good Old Games
Donate to Codex
Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Odds are, something you like very much sucks. Why? Because this is the RPG Codex
News Content Gallery People Games Companies  
Forums About Donate RSS Contact Us!  

Swords and Sorcery: Underworld Gold Reviewed at GB

Visit our sponsors! (or click here and disable ads)

Swords and Sorcery: Underworld Gold Reviewed at GB

Review - posted by Zed on Sun 9 December 2012, 05:31:31

Tags: OlderBytes; Swords and Sorcery: Underworld

GameBanshee has a review up of Olderbytes' Swords and Sorcery: Underworld Gold.

They don't love it, but they seem to kinda like it:

I played version 2.0.16 of Underworld Gold, and sadly it's still a little bit sloppy. Some parts of the game haven't been implemented yet (you're supposed to get attacked sometimes when you rest, but it doesn't happen), some parts of the game don't work (a strength-increasing beverage always claims you've already drunk it), and there are a host of silly typos (like "antichamber," "prisonner," and "pondered silk gown"). Fortunately, none of these problems prevent players from completing the game, and Charles Clerc has been very good about releasing updates, so hopefully he'll get everything straightened out soon.

Overall, I had mixed feelings about Underworld Gold. It reminded me of my youth playing RPGs (and breaking out the graph paper and colored pencils), but I'm not sure if I wouldn't have been better off playing one of those older games rather than this new one. That being said, Underworld Gold is only $15, it works just fine on Windows 7, and it gives you about 40 hours of content. It wasn't my favorite game of the year, but it seems like a fine risk if you're looking for something different to try. ​

You can download the demo from here and have a peek yourself.

There are 7 comments on Swords and Sorcery: Underworld Gold Reviewed at GB

Site hosted by Sorcerer's Place Link us!
Codex definition, a book manuscript.
eXTReMe Tracker RSS Feed
This page was created in 0.025911092758179 seconds