Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critics What's this?

User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 157 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: With Fire & Sword also builds and expands upon the highly regarded combat system from Mount & Blade: Warband. Firearms have been introduced to the battlefield, opening up exciting new play-styles and options. Players can also utilize explosives for taking out groups of foes or to breach castle walls. In addition to the enhanced singleplayer mode, With Fire and Sword also provides a host of original multiplayer content including the new Captain Mode which allows players to control their own forces in online matches.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 24
  2. Negative: 1 out of 24
  1. May 13, 2011
    The multiplayer is a blast and the battles just feel so epic. For $15, you really can't go wrong with this action RPG. It will take some patience, but once you understand how the game works, you will be hooked.
  2. Jun 18, 2011
    An affordable, bottomless action-RPG that loves freedom. [Aug 2011, p.68]
  3. May 15, 2011
    Gunpowder brings more tactical options to the fun and interesting Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword.
  4. May 11, 2011
    The third episode of Mount & Blade has a setting and characters well defined, but lacks something that can truly renew the gaming experience.
  5. Jun 23, 2011
    With Fire and Sword is an expansion that adds very little to the Mount&Blade experience. It's still a solid game, but one would expect more innovation. Still, the hectic battles on horseback leave the player with a brutal appreciation for medieval combat.
  6. May 11, 2011
    This new addition to the excellent indie Turkish franchise constitutes the best and most complete choice for newcomers. Unfortunately, the veterans of the franchise won't find anything radical different that haven't already seen in previous installments.
  7. Jun 17, 2011
    Stay away. [July 2011, p.98]

See all 24 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 26 out of 52
  2. Negative: 10 out of 52
  1. May 17, 2011
    Fire and Sword is great and a heck of an addictive game, although it is little similar to older mount and blades but i am still enjoying it. Bring of firearms in action has increased a lot of gameplay, Rifles and muskets really makes the scenario more challenging, just one shot and you are dead. the Grenades are probably the most fun part of the game, Although i would appreciate if we could hold more than 12 of them. The storyline is neither great nor bad. Although the reason i am giving this game a 10 is because of the multiplayer. which is extremely fun to play....Its just awsome, and because of the new items in the game, the multiplayer just gets better and better Expand
  2. May 5, 2011
    This game fills a huge gap which Total War series left open. If you know sequel, this is not a big improvement but there are not many games which presents medieval fps warfare while you still can use macro advancements like recruiting mercenaries to build an army and so on. Price is absolutely a bargain, but I should say I prefer some stunning graphics with a more expensive price tag.
    Only missing thing is achievements and multiplayer leveling, which I suppose will have a negative effect on the total online play hours. In the following days game will release a Turkish patch to satisfy its local players, maybe we can expect an online experience/ladder system, or at least some achievements.
  3. Jul 31, 2014
    Fun Med-Evil Warfare Combat Swords Spears Bows Axes Plus Much More This game takes a bit of time to learn how to play , After you learn how to play its a very fun game to play
    This is a game that will took up a lot of youre Game-Play Time this game is very fun and a good challenge
    The Online is fun to play with a group of friends it makes for some good times , some good laughs , and Fun to be had.
    I Give this game an 88/100
  4. Nov 15, 2012
    Decent follow up to Warband with new factions and the major introduction of Guns to the game changing the gameplay and your tactics. However that is all it really offers that is different and Warband is still really a better game. Expand
  5. Oct 20, 2011
    I disagree with lot of people when they say this is a 'fair game''. I feel as though its much harder to survive compared to warbands because of the guns. Don't get me wrong they implemented the gun feature well and they are super effective... but are they too effective? To me it seems as though its caused an imbalance and it makes the game much harder as they do super effective damage (compared to archery) and are more direct and accurate. There are a few other problems with it, but what I've described is my main concern. I think the game was a good idea but i don't think they put as much into it as they could have. Collapse
  6. Oct 29, 2014
    With Fire & Sword is a version of the game Mount & Blade, the game that claims to be a mix of a role play game and a wargame. The most obvious changes are the replacement of crossbows with firearms, a new map and the 16th/17th century setting. This is the time that warfare gradually changed from melee based to firearm based.
    (A side note: the setting actually mixes aspects of the 16 century setting with that of the 17th century. The halbediers belong more to the former century and the musketeers/cavalry more to the latter.)
    There some other changes. There seem to be more quests and the recruitment system has been overhauled. However, at the core the game is the same and as such has the same problems as the old game, such as a rudimentary battlefield mechanism, a nonexistent storyline, a simplistic dialogue tree, superficial boring personalities and tedious repetitive battles of which there are way too many. And these problems are now compounded by the introduction of firearms.
    With muskets you can kill an adversary from the other side of the map and what is more.. he can do the same. In fact the ai is actually better at shooting because it isn't bothered by the fact that from a distance avatars are so small that you can't make them out right.
    My first half hour was spend being shot to pieces. The only way to escape that fate is by moving in an unpredictable pattern so the enemy can't take aim properly. In the meantime you either have to try and kill them with your own firearm(while moving about in a random way!) or with your sidearm. Battles turn therefore into protracted hit and run activities in which standing still is an invite to be killed on the spot.
    The militia that you can recruit at the start is woefully inept to deal with anything better than looters and once you have enough of them to actually have a chance to win a fight, your army is so slow that you can't catch deserters, brigands and such because they are faster than you. So you either have to fight enemies who are superior to your inept troops.. or hope to corner a band of ruffians,which involves you in chasing them across the map hoping you won't loose sight of them when the night sets in or when they run into a wooded area.
    In fact the best thing to do is not to recruit any militia or infantry but to go from town to town to find and hire mercenary cavalry or heroes so you can overtake your enemies or have a chance to runaway from them when they are too strong.
    In any event the game seems to promise to become a protracted boring game, like the basic game was, but now you can use firearms and play on a map that represents eastern europe.
    The game is neither a good role play game nor a good wargame, because it doesn't implement either aspect well and it amazes me that people actually consider this game to be good.
    But I guess tastes differ..
  7. Dec 27, 2011
    **** game's boring that I cant tell how this game's good.Gamecube-like graphics, repeditive gameplay,this & that.Don't play this.

See all 52 User Reviews