Metascore
75

Generally favorable reviews - based on 10 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 10
  2. Negative: 0 out of 10
  1. Apr 5, 2015
    90
    Ironcast is a wonderous puzzle game that blends perfectly with other genres to create a stunning experience.
  2. Apr 17, 2015
    87
    Challenging and captivating turn based match-3-variation somewhere between PuzzleQuest and FTL: Faster Than Light.
  3. Mar 27, 2015
    85
    Ironcast is a small game that manages to integrate some very cool mechanics in engaging ways and the fact that, at its core, it embraces the impact of dying associated with rogue-like titles makes each campaign unique.
  4. May 5, 2015
    80
    The presentation could be better, but the mechanics are so solid that most players won't mind the flat appearance and audio. For those looking for a punishing version of Puzzle Quest, Ironcast is it.
  5. Apr 22, 2015
    80
    Ironcast exists admirably outside the match-3ing.
  6. Mar 29, 2015
    80
    A must-buy for the Match-3 genre fans. Ironcast is a game where you will enjoy playing battles between war machines. For this you will have to use your resources right and think twice about your next move. A good recipe for a roguelike title that will have you playing again and again, long into the night.
  7. Apr 6, 2015
    65
    Ironcast starts as a highly promising blend of puzzle game and turn-based tactical mechanics, but is ultimately let down by its monotony, uneven difficulty and sheer lack of content.
  8. 60
    With regards to the artwork, the designs of the Ironcasts and Steamtanks themselves are noteworthy. The backgrounds, however, are very, very bland and simple. Repetitive buildings and uninspiring scenery make for a visual experience that doesn't do the concept justice.
  9. Mar 30, 2015
    56
    After a promising start all the good ideas vanish, leaving an experience with a lot of potential that ends up being more boring that it should.
  10. Mar 27, 2015
    50
    Ironcast certainly is a little bit of fun, initially. But as you grind your way through mundane turn based battles, one mission feels like the next.
User Score
7.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 27 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 27
  2. Negative: 4 out of 27
  1. May 8, 2015
    8
    Not quite sure what made the other negative reviewers so sour about this game, but If you are a matching/RPG lover, I don't see how youNot quite sure what made the other negative reviewers so sour about this game, but If you are a matching/RPG lover, I don't see how you couldn't like this game. The design of the game is global playthrough (meaning if you die during your current campaign you can start with different, and more powerful gear next campaign.

    I have really enjoyed the game thus far, and I would disregard the negative posts, because either the game was too complex, or they had absolutely no idea what they were buying? It is cheap either way, so I definitely think this game is well worth it!
    Full Review »
  2. Apr 11, 2015
    6
    The concept of this game is lost on some people, clearly.
    Although this is a match-3 with a twist, the idea is to *think* about what you're
    The concept of this game is lost on some people, clearly.
    Although this is a match-3 with a twist, the idea is to *think* about what you're going to match up before you match it. You get three chances to match three or more of separate components of your ironcast (which is just a steampunk variety of mechwarrior), then you have to *think* about what you're going to do about those separate components of your ironcast. Are you going to fix any damage to any particular part/s of the ironcast, are you going to raise the shields more than once or twice, and so on and so forth. It's not "all that" by any means, it's certainly not mind-blowingly refreshing, because just as there are far too many hidden object games in the market, there's certainly far too many match-3 type games on the market as well, this just attempts to add a little more to it.
    Despite being a match-3 that you'd think was at least somewhat easy, it seems to place much of it's replayability on a reward system based on the XP you amass throughout several attempts at finishing the game (which never will happen on the first try without some kind of cheating going on).
    It's kind of detrimental to the game to have it like that from a player's POV, but from a dev's POV it's easy enough to see why they would choose to have it that way.
    It's not overwhelmingly impressive, it's not like it's bringing anything drastically new to the market, but it's a clean and fairly polished attempt at a simple genre of game that involves more than just matching 3 or more of the same thing together. It won't be everyone's cup of tea, it's not really mine, but I have played it, it's good enough to be played by the average Joe.
    Fair try.
    Full Review »
  3. Apr 3, 2015
    8
    A fiendishly difficult game that has more than an element of a roguelike about it, combining random luck with very solid match-3 mechanics andA fiendishly difficult game that has more than an element of a roguelike about it, combining random luck with very solid match-3 mechanics and a steampunk artstyle.

    It has minor faults - the game ends too quick for my tastes as I was enjoying it immensely until the abrupt end, and the story is decent but concluded sloppily - but I had a great deal of fun in the 18 hours it took me to beat it, and hopefully the ending sets up a very well earned sequel in the future.

    At £10, this game is a no-brainer for puzzle and strategy fans alike.
    Full Review »