Battle for Blood

About

Battle for Blood is a single player casual puzzle game. It was developed by YFC games and was released on July 8, 2015. It received mostly positive reviews from players.

Constant fun and excitement! Bloody fighting from the start. Epic battles within 30 seconds. An all-new game type is coming!

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player

Skip User Reviews

74%

Audience ScoreBased on 387 reviews

gameplay7 positive mentions

grinding59 negative mentions

The game features a unique combination of match-3 mechanics and real-time strategy, allowing players to summon troops based on their matches.
The graphics are visually appealing, with a charming art style that enhances the overall experience.
It's a free-to-play game that offers a decent amount of content without requiring players to spend money to progress.

The game can become repetitive and grindy, especially as players progress to higher levels where upgrades are necessary.
There are issues with the game's pacing, including waiting times when running out of moves, which can disrupt the flow of gameplay.
As a mobile port, the game lacks optimization for PC, including limited screen resolution options and a clunky user interface.

grinding
60 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
2%
98%
The reviews indicate that grinding is a significant aspect of the game, with many players finding it tedious and time-consuming, especially for upgrades and achievements. While some enjoy the mindless nature of grinding in a casual match-3 format, others express frustration over the excessive amount required, particularly if they wish to avoid microtransactions. Overall, the game offers a mix of fun and frustration, with grinding being a common theme in player experiences.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “A lot of grinding to beat the game.”
- “The entire game is pretty smooth in my opinion, but the loads of grinding you have to do to upgrade your units is pretty troublesome.”
- “The only downside is that the game gets grindy pretty quick.”
gameplay
32 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
22%
65%
13%
The gameplay is a blend of real-time tactical decisions and match-3 mechanics, offering a mix of strategic unit placement and resource management, though it can feel repetitive and simplistic at times. While some players appreciate the charming visuals and casual vibe, others criticize the game for its pay-to-win elements and lack of depth, particularly in its PC adaptation. Overall, it appeals to casual gamers but may frustrate those seeking more complex gameplay.
- “The gameplay focuses on real-time tactical decisions, including managing resources and strategically placing units to defeat your enemies.”
- “Overall, it's a thrilling choice for fans of epic battles and strategic gameplay.”
- “Battle for Blood is a pretty cool mashup of quick strategy elements and match-3 mechanics, originally a mobile game.”
- “Gameplay consists of basic match-3 stuff with some kind of lame soldier defense thing tacked on.”
- “Gameplay is boring and the only thing redeeming about it might be the music.”
- “The game's mechanics don't work on a PC format too well, and it's obviously an unaltered mobile port.”
graphics
17 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
41%
41%
18%
The graphics of the game receive mixed reviews, with some praising the stunning visuals and charming art style reminiscent of titles like Castle Crashers, while others find them merely serviceable or lacking in detail. Overall, the simplistic yet appealing graphics contribute to an immersive experience, though opinions vary on their execution and quality.
- “With stunning visuals and fast-paced action, it offers an immersive experience.”
- “I think the magic is on the beautiful visuals and unit designs and the fact that your connect-3 skills actually translate to you winning or losing a battle.”
- “Overall a good time waster and has a nice simplistic art style which I really like.”
- “The graphics could work, but the textures look like ass.”
- “Altogether the game's art style does remind me of Castle Crashers, so there's that, and the soundtrack is decent, but altogether, the game doesn't stand out to me in any real way.”
- “Objective: 2/5 — graphics: a — content: c — handling: c”
monetization
16 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
19%
62%
19%
The monetization aspect of the game has drawn mixed reviews, with many players noting the presence of microtransactions that can significantly impact gameplay. While some find the microtransactions inoffensive and manageable, others criticize the game for its heavy reliance on grinding to avoid spending money, suggesting it feels more like a mobile port designed to maximize revenue from in-app purchases. Overall, players express frustration over the balance between free-to-play mechanics and the necessity of grinding or spending to progress effectively.
- “As for the microtransactions, I found the ones in this game to be quite inoffensive.”
- “Cash is not required to progress or win, and the player is not asked for the truly 'micro' microtransactions you see in some games where they ask for $0.99 to continue playing a single level.”
- “But this is a very fun game and to support the creators, I did buy the no ads version on my phone.”
- “You'll still grind, mind you, if you want to get to the end, because if you pay close enough attention, Battle for Blood has microtransactions.”
- “Had this been put up for $2 without the pay-to-play system and more emphasis on puzzles, I think it would have been okay (as a developer's first game), but it's clearly a port from iOS or Android, with little thought to the standards of PC players. It seems more like it's about getting it to the masses to soak up revenue from in-app purchases.”
- “I'm sure I could go on and on about issues with the game, but it's just a brainless PC port hoping to cash in on that PC dollar with microtransactions.”
story
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
50%
25%
The game's story is described as minimal and largely serves as a backdrop for gameplay, with players battling evil using various troops. While some reviews note that it has a basic storyline that progresses slowly and is easy to follow, others criticize it for lacking depth, suggesting that the narrative feels more like filler between levels rather than a compelling plot. Overall, the story is functional but not a standout feature of the game.
- “Fun game not too hard and good story line :)”
- “A lot of games will try to give you a deep story where in match-3 games, the stories are pretty bland and used more as filler between and explaining why the levels exist in the order they do.”
- “You know how puzzle quest took match-3 games and added a level of interest to them by mixing the abstract puzzle-solving with some light RPG elements?”
- “The threadbare storyline says that you are battling evil, and for that you have an assortment of troops, some of which are available by default, and some that are unlocked as you progress.”
- “The game doesn't have a story; you just pass through levels.”
- “A lot of games will try to give you a deep story, but in match-3 games, the stories are pretty bland and used more as filler between levels, explaining why they exist in the order they do.”
music
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
42%
33%
25%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players finding it funny and enjoyable, while others criticize it as recycled and average. Although a few users appreciate the soundtrack, many note that it lacks originality and is often too loud. Overall, the music is seen as a redeeming quality for some, but it fails to elevate the game significantly.
- “The music and sound effects are really funny.”
- “Gameplay is boring and the only thing redeeming about it might be the music.”
- “Altogether the game's art style does remind me of Castle Crashers, so there's that, and the soundtrack is decent.”
- “Sound and music are just bad.”
- “Recycled music and sound effects from Spartans vs. Zombies.”
- “It's 10 times louder than average MP3 music volume.”
humor
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is highlighted by its amusing sound effects and quirky unit interactions, such as the creepy laughter of summoned archers, which adds a lighthearted touch to the gameplay. However, some players feel that the pay-to-win elements detract from the overall comedic experience.
- “The music and sound effects are really funny.”
- “It's fun; the sounds of summoned units are funny, and you could complete the game in about 5-8 hours depending on your luck.”
- “The answer is: when you spawn an archer, they laugh creepily, which is really hilarious.”
optimization
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
75%
75%
The game's optimization is generally positive, with users noting that it runs smoothly without significant performance issues like stuttering or slowdowns, which is uncommon for Unity games. However, some players feel it lacks optimization for computers, suggesting room for improvement in this area. Overall, while the performance is stable, the gameplay experience may be hindered by its lack of innovation and engagement.
- “Your performance in the match-3 affects the soldier defense minigame.”
- “The game was not a new concept, but it played okay - mostly boring - with few bugs but no slowdowns from the performance side of Unity.”
- “It's made using the Unity engine and it's one of the rare Unity games that doesn't stutter, slow down the machine, or skip mouse clicks.”
- “The game was not a new concept, but played okay - mostly boring - few bugs but no slowdowns from the performance side of Unity.”
- “It's made using the Unity engine and it's one of the rare Unity games that aren't stuttering, slowing down the machine, skipping mouse clicks, etc.”
- “Boohoo, it's not optimized for computers.”
stability
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game is reported to have significant stability issues, including numerous bugs and glitches, particularly at level 50, which detracts from the overall experience. Players have also noted problems with achievements not functioning properly.
- “Level 50 is buggy.”
- “Obviously a new game, with tons of bugs, glitches, and not working achievements.”
replayability
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
100%
The game has limited replayability, primarily revolving around upgrading units to complete previously beaten levels more efficiently. Reviewers suggest that rebalancing unit types could enhance replay value, especially in comparison to more engaging match-3 games available on platforms like Facebook, Kongregate, and Steam.
- “The game would benefit from each unit type being rebalanced to allow for more replayability, especially considering that platforms like Facebook, Kongregate, and even Steam offer far superior match-3 games.”
- “No real replay value other than to keep upgrading units so you beat the levels you already did faster.”
- “The game would benefit from each unit type being rebalanced to allow this, as it might add some more replayability. Given the fact that Facebook, Kongregate, and even Steam itself offer far superior match-3 games...”