WATCH OUT FOR REVIEW

By Peter Butter · April 24, 2009

After bloomer inquired why my old review for Sword of Sodan (dates back all the way to 2001) never found its way to HG, I figured I might as well bring it over. In doing so I've corrected a few typos and style issues. I have deliberately not touched the content, although I was tempted. I figure in 2001 I gave my opinion the best I could, and if I update this one, I risk wanting to update ALL of them and that's a neverending cycle I don't want to get into. I'd rather spend that time writing something new.

So in mostly unaltered state, here's Sword of Sodan for your perusal and possibly even nostalgia. Watch out for pits.

About the blogger

Peter Butter

Starting out as a small time reviewer and FAQ author on GameFAQs, my writing has been even more tilted toward the old school than my gaming. I enjoy games of many eras, but I always found it more compelling to write for something that hasn't been done extensively already, which often ruled out the more modern games I played as I tend to run at least a couple of years behind the facts. My Honestgamers catalogue was initially just copying over much of my old GameFAQs work, and then for a time dual submitting to both sites. But over 2015 I posted my first HG exclusives, with hopefully more to follow.

Ko-fi

RSS feed More from Peter Butter's blog →

Comments 6

randxian Apr 24, 2009

Good review. That game sounds like a completle piece of junk. I really hate those games where you character takes up so much of the screen that you can't see incoming enemies and obstacles.

aschultz Apr 25, 2009

Good to see that review again--so what's the "new" you want to go in for? Any immediate candidates?

sashanan Blogger Apr 25, 2009

Not yet, no. I do have a candidate for my next FAQ project - a PC classic called Centurion: Defender of Rome - but reviews I'm not sure on. I may try Dragon Quest V once I finish it up.

bloomer Apr 26, 2009

This review is still in great shape.

The thing about the IIGS version that never got made (sorry to prattle on about it) is that the computer had no graphics chip, only a sound chip. So of the 3 platforms that were going to get Sword of Sodan, the IIGS was gonna handle all the huge sprites with no graphics co-processor. The IIGS demo shows it doing this and is thus highly admired in IIGS circles.

Of course the game is reviewed abysmally for the Genesis, but SBAllen says the Amiga version is pretty good. The Amiga has speech for the stupid warnings, and also enemies don't come from both sides, only the right. The IIGS version demo is the same, with enemies coming only from the right.

sashanan Blogger Apr 26, 2009

At the time of the review I was unaware that Sword of Sodan was a multiplatform game - I thought it was just a terrible game in and of itself. Since then I've learned that this is mostly just a very botched port - a familiar phenomenon to Commodore 64 veterans like me.

Years after the C64 had been bypassed left and right by more powerful systems, it still got a couple of ports of the games being released on them, heavily dumped down to still technically function, but bereft of any actual value as a game. In hindsight, even without having played any other versions of it, the Genesis' Sword of Sodan feels very much like that.

Which doesn't take away the fact that, to put it in TVTropes terms, this port is squarely in the So Bad It's Good category, and along with Bokosuka Wars and a couple of other classics, this is a game we loved to rag on the RCB back in the day. I just jumped on the bandwagon, really.

And I followed my personal reviewing philosophy in doing so, to first finish the game if at all reasonably possible. The mental scars healed in time.

jelloatlunch09 Jul 17, 2009

hey man, i caught up with you here on HG, and like the stuff i'm reading on your reviews and posts. hope to see more soon!