Posted on: December 5, 2015
fahbs
Possesseur vérifiéJeux: 354 Avis: 90
A halfway decent oldschool Roguelike
A Roguelike before that was even a thing. Most of Sword of the Samurai has aged surprisingly well. It's a clever system where the game is divided into tiers. First you're a samurai trying to edge out rival samurai to become local daimyo, then you're daimyo trying to edge out rival daimyos to become clan leader, then you're a clan leader leading armies on conquests. It's a shame you never really saw this system take off in more strategy games where the scope changed as your empire grew (fiddling with worker placement is fun for your first one or two Civ cities, not so much after your 10th). The action segments are still simple and fun. There is one major flaw though. By far the weakest of the mini-games is the army battle, and unfortunately it is also the most common one as you advance in the game. While you can theoretically avoid most of the lone warrior segments, you MUST partake in many army battles to ultimately win. Imagine controlling a clunky Total War game with only the keyboard and clunky 80s graphics and you have a decent picture of the army battles. They're not even satisfying because the computer never moves when defending, making victory a matter of cheese as you gang up a flank and roll up the line. Against all common sense this means you have a massive advantage attacking, plus you can afford to lose an attack while it's instant game over if you lose a single defense (no matter how much territory you hold) so the best strategy is to constantly attack every turn and eliminate clans before they attack you. I usually get bored of the army battles and quit to start a new game soon after I become clan leader. Worth checking out if you want an ancient, action version of Medieval Total War and are fine with skipping a tedious end game. Sword of the Samurai is one of those old games desperately in need of a polished modern remake.
Trouvez-vous ce commentaire utile ?
