Reviews for Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword DNS

60

An OK game, But that's it

noobboy191 | June 24, 2013 | See all noobboy191's reviews »

Compared to the other game, mount and blade warband, I feel this is incredibly lacking. The Graphics are the same as warband in my opinion, but due to gunpowder particles it can make a battle seem more thematic, like after a huge battle you can rise through the smoke to see the bodies of you're enemies on the floor.In terms of mechanics, wfas IS FAR BEHIND warband. Warband allows you to rule your own kingdom whenever you're ready. In wfas it only allows you to rule after a certain part of the storyline is passed, meaning you can't be the ruler you want to be until way into the story, and in some cases only for a set amount of time.Also marriage is completely unavailable unlike warband. What this game does get right is the suspense. The absolute greatest thing in this game is the suspense. Whether you are commanding your marksmen and having a full out musket firefight, not knowing if your shot will connect, and more importantly, if the enemy hits you first, or reloading your rifle as a horseman charges at you.

In the end as a game, this is a very suspenseful and thematic game, but if you want the most bang for your buck, I suggest warband

59

Call of duty Fire and Sword.

brenker99 | June 4, 2013 | See all brenker99's reviews »

This game is Like the previous ones but with Guns, that ruin the game. The guns ruined it. they just did. I got 50+hours in the other 2 games of the series and about 2 in Fire and sword. This game worth 6/10.

80

Fire and Sword!

kalil | June 4, 2013 | See all kalil's reviews »

It appears as usual, by the company responsible for creating Mount and Blade (Taleworlds) make certain modders work to bring to market their own games. The result of this product among the most righteous of this award winning Turkish company.

With Fire & Sword is the third game Taleworlds independent, which takes us back three centuries after the adventures in Warband. We went then contact the dreaded guns, taking popularity in sixteenth century Europe. This game, based first on a solid story mode allows us to immerse ourselves in a major way in the game. The story, based on a remarkable novel of a similar name to the game is complete, immersive 3 different aspects that, in no way detract from the freedom of action that characterize the series.

However, this title suffers from a lot of "bugs" and errors that make the gaming experience will be seriously damaged. Sometimes it is impossible to advance the story because of these failures. On the other hand, the modder community has presented great interest in this game, so practically we found no modification to improve the decisions of With Fire and Sword.

It is, in conclusion, a great game with certain faults that detract from gameplay. A new era to enjoy a new Mount & Blade.

55

Not What I Expected

cevana | May 26, 2013 | See all cevana's reviews »

Building off of Mount & Blade Warband, I had high expectations for WFAS. I can't say I'm not a little disappointed. I had heard much of how imbalancing the introduction of firearms was. Having played the excellent Napopleonic Wars, I had a hard time seeing how this could be a problem.

I should have listened. There is very little as frustratingly out-of-your control by being one-shotted off of your horse by an enemy rifle. Rare, but since the consequence is defeat and capture, the steaks are too high. Thus, you end up trying to stay out of harms way and play commander. Too bad the introduction of firearms dilutes battlefield tactics as well. Mass guns and fire, rinse, repeat.

Pros: -An interesting change of pace from the Medieval setting. If you already own the game (as part of a Paradox package for instance), it's still worth checking out.

Cons: -Firearms are not implemented well, and disrupt the wonderful combat from Warband -Money is hard to come by and very integral to progress (I spent much of my time trading, rather than fighting) -Main quest breaking bugs can occur

75

For modders and tons of fun

dagozu | May 18, 2013 | See all dagozu's reviews »

Mount & Blade itself is an very good game but it hasn't been polished. The graphics of the game are not great, the game mechanics could be better but these things are minor issues when you think how much fun this game is when played. The singleplayer is ok but in the multiplayer the real fun begins, You can have up to 128 players on a map at the same time, other side attacking a castle and other defending it. I have had tons of fun in this game as a defender and as a attacker. I would suggest this game to people who want to have fun in the multiplyer and like playing medieval games.

Of course you need to have original Mount & Blade to play this expansion. But the guns are nice add on to the game and create new battles that the original game does not have.

53

Not all too great.

TheGrizzlyB | April 24, 2013 | See all TheGrizzlyB's reviews »

This game is just not that good. Now I'm not sure if it came out before or after Warband did, but it definitely isn't as good as warband. I'm also not really one for the singleplayer in M&B games so I can't really critique that, but I can say I don't really like the weapons in multiplayer. All in all I'd say skip this one if you're looking to play a M&B game, and instead get warband and the expansions. It is a lot better.

55

What happened?

PM_DMNKLR | Jan. 29, 2013 | See all PM_DMNKLR's reviews »

What on Earth happened to this game? I had such high hopes for it, but honestly it just didn't live up at all. I checked it out once and only a few minutes was all I could take. The story and such aren't bad, but for me it's the 90's style graphics and movements that pushed me away from it. It's dropped tremendously in price compared to what it was released at, so perhaps $10 USD isn't too bad for it, but if you can wait for a good sale price to snag it and try it out, go for it.

72

Very similar to the previous Mount & Blade

panz3r88 | Oct. 28, 2012 | See all panz3r88's reviews »

Mount & Blade:With Fire and Swords is very similar to the previous title of the series: you are a mercenary that must travel though the land looking for fame and fortune. The main difference between this title and its predecessor is the presence of firearms: with these weapons the tactics you must use during fights are differents. The other aspects of the game remains unchanged: the graphic is really outdated and the open world gamplay is still fun, especially in multiplayer If you are a fun of this series, Mount & Blade is really a good game that can add a lot of new hours of gameplay

45

A glorified mod.

Tholdor | Sept. 24, 2012 | See all Tholdor's reviews »

With Fire and Sword is based on a pretty decent Polish book by a Polish author about a part of Polish history (yeah, I know...). The game is presented as something new, which it is, but only partially. It's, basically, a modification of the original Mount & Blade with different map, new weapons (like firearms) and slightly different systems. Most of the changes are good, like guns and wagon forts, but some are pretty down-turning, like the inability to form a new kingdom.

It would be a decent game, if mods weren't doing as well (or even better) than it. And for free. Obviously, to enjoy mods, you have to buy the original game or, preferably, the standalone expansion, Warband. Warband offers much more than WFaS, such as improved graphics, the opportunity to start a new kingdom, and a lot more modding potential.

My suggestion is to buy Warband. This game is nice, but it offers nothing new after you've played some mods.

65

Good but Warband is better.

zhack075 | Sept. 3, 2012 | See all zhack075's reviews »

I bought the Mount and blade collection and I was really curious.

Well, I prefer warband which stay the best M&B. I disliked the era and the atmosphere of this game. In fact I think that firearms are little bit cheated and you can die easily by taking a shot from nowhere. I definitly prefer the Medieval era of Warband.

Moreover, all the mods are released for warband and not Fire and sword.

Buy it only if you want another mount and blade experience after Warband but if it's your first M&B, try warband first !

68

WARBAND!!!

Dagexon | April 16, 2012 | See all Dagexon's reviews »

Please do not think that all the mount and blade games are bad, Warband is amazing and I'm sure that Mount and Blade 2 which is under way will be too but however With fire and sword does not live up to the standards of Mount and blade Warband.

The singleplayer in Warband gave you a huge amount of freedom yet this game did not give you as much. For starters you can't even play as a women (not that I did in Warband though) which is sexist yet the game is set in a sexist society. This is what I did not like about the game, it tried to be more realistic and so it tried to focus a bit more on politics than before so to speak. Warband was set in a bit more of a fantasy land and was not restrained too much by reality yet didn't go over the top and have mythical creatures and all. Don't get me wrong, Warband is still rather realistic but it still isn't RESTRAINED by reality if your following me. We play a video game for fun, not for a realistic experience this is why with fire and sword failed. It was put in a time when firearms where heavily used and for purposes of reality keeps it that way yet for purposes of reality it made the fire arms so inaccurate which makes fights boring as the enemies are always using them but unable to hit you and you are unable to hit them. If you really are desperate to play a mount and blade game with fire arms then please get Warband and find a mod with them (trust me there are many fire arm mods) but don't get this.

65

Doesn't live up to expectations

wengart | July 28, 2011 | See all wengart's reviews »

With FIre and Sword adds a new way of recruiting troops, a historical map, and firearms and grenades. I find the new recruitment system the most interesting additions. Instead of recruiting tens of villagers and then feeding them into the medieval version of the Somme hoping some of them survive long enough to vet you purchase mercs. It just seems much more realistic to me. Fire and sword also introduces you to a map of Eastern Europe to do battle on. Which is nice, especially for those of us familiar with the history of the area. Firearms are a double edge sword at best. They provide a new dynamic to the fighting, cavalry is no longer as effective due to the guns quickly killing horses and the player must be much more cautious since a bullet or two will kill you.

But in the end even the new style of recruitment, historical map, and the introduction of guns and grenades doesn't make it worth the asking price. There are mods out for both Mount & Blade and Warband that do what this game does better and cheaper.

65

Worse than Previous Games.

IganX | July 22, 2011 | See all IganX's reviews »

M&B: With Fire and Sword was disappointing compared to M&B: Warband. This game has less options, more glitches and bugs, is smaller and adds gunfire. This last feature makes the battles depend less on skill and more on luck, making large scale battles look worse than before. The campaign is fine, and the graphics have some small improvement, but being based on the novel hasn't made this game better than the previous. I loved the sandbox taste M&B: Warband had, which seems to be lost in this more linear game. Overall, the game is still fine, but loses a bit compared to the previous sequel of M&B.

55

Disappointing

steamisbetter | July 3, 2011 | See all steamisbetter's reviews »

With Fire and Sword is Mount & Blade with guns.

Guns replace crossbows and are in many ways similar. They do more damage than bows, take forever to reload and don't lose accuracy when in aim mode. All guns in the game fall into two categories: muskets and pistols. Pistols are less accurate and do less damage, but are faster to reload and, if on foot, don't require you to stand still during the reload animation. The other less obvious difference is that pistols are single-handed weapons, and while there's sadly no dual-wielding in this game, it means that the "blind spot" for horseback shooting is on your left side, as opposed to two-handed ranged weapons where the blind spot is to your right. Also, you can use your gun as a last resort melee weapon, but at that point you're probably dead already.

Old throwing weapons have been replaced with hand grenades. This is a good change, as grenades are very fun to use and throwing weapons in previous game were subpar to say the least. Grenades do splash damage and have a knockback effect. They are however very expensive and only come in limited quantities, so you can't really play as a grenadier and simply spam grenades.

Other equipment is still there, but they are now less useful and commonplace. Bullets simply do much more damage and travel very fast. Horses tend to go down very quick under gunfire. Getting within melee range is quite tough, especially against pistol users. Bows are a rare sight in multiplayer, the only advantage of bows is their faster rate of fire, but you can always carry multiple guns and simply switch between shots, then hide and reload. Shields are virtually useless.

Ability to kick is still there and it is still used almost exclusively by griefers. A patch also added crouching, which makes you a smaller target while you reload your gun, as if the game didn't have enough campers already.

I didn't find the multiplayer maps very interesting. Just generic battlegrounds without charm of Warband maps. Maybe it's because I spent so much time in one spot firing shots at enemies that I didn't really get to explore the rest of the map. Or maybe it's because the maps were designed for that kind of gameplay.

The game is realistic, but not in a good way. There are 5 historically accurate factions and they aren't as diverse as the factions in previous games. The game takes place in eastern Europe, which means the maps consist almost entirely of grassland and small patches of forests. There's no snow or desert environments, and only a small amount of rough terrain. You also can't start your own kingdom, you can only choose to become a rebel but it's not really the same. When the game was released, you couldn't play as a female character, but this feature was later added in a patch. I really don't see how the game benefits from realism. It's based on a Polish novel with the same name, so I suppose some may find it interesting, but I had never even heard of the novel before.

Ultimately, I think the biggest problem is that they are still using the same old game engine. It excels at mounted combat, directional attacks and blocking. Not long range sniper fest gunfights. The UI has always been a bit clunky and the addition of main quests and real storylines makes in even more obvious. Also, I think there are some big balance issues with some of main quests. One of them has you breaking out of a prison, all you have is a melee weapon and you're up against gun users in long corridors with no cover. I had to lower the difficulty to complete that one. If you fail, the game kicks you back to main menu. That is not something you'd expect in a sandbox game.

The engine is getting outdated and not suitable for this kind of gameplay. I think the developers too realize this. But as with the previous games, the true potential of the game is yet to be seen, just wait while modders start to really get their hands on it. Overall, I didn't find the game as enjoyable as the previous ones, but I still got 44 hours of enjoyment out of it shortly after release. I'd strongly recommend Warband over this one.

51

Average game

pngohuy | June 29, 2011 | See all pngohuy's reviews »

Mount and Blade : Fire and Sword is the third game in the Mount and Blade series. As this game released, I bought it via Steam. In this version, there are both good and bad things.

The good things are : basic combat is same as the Warband version, it is now more risky and fun. it will have more fun when playing with other players. The bad things are more than the good ones : many old features are not available in this game : less options in this game, for example no longer can you marry a noblewoman in order to become a noble, you can't create your own kingdom (which is the best part of Mount & Blade). Moreover, the ability to play as a female character is gone too. Some of the locations look nice, while others look terrible.

The last thing : if anyone is new to Mount and Blade series, he should purchase the Warband version first. This is the best one in the series in my opinion.

35

Disappointing

gege_le_keke | May 9, 2011 | See all gege_le_keke's reviews »

I love M&B, especially Warband, so I was excited about this new episode. Sadly, this game has many flaws. First of all, it is kind of buggy, but I'm sure that some patches will sort out this little problem. What really annoys me is that the firearms are too realistic. These one shot one kill weapons make the battles really slow because of the time needed to reload. The map isn't very interesting, and the name of the cities are impossible to remember. However, I really enjoyed the historical background. The recruiting system is weird, I really prefer the previous one. I think this game could have been a M&B: Warband mod instead of a full game...