Battles of Prince of Persia

 DS
  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Dec 6, 2005
Metascore
64

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 16
  2. Mixed: 9 out of 16
  3. Negative: 2 out of 16
Buy Now
Buy on
  1. Eurogamer
    40
    Far too similar to games that are wonderful. So while it's not hideous or unplayable, it constantly reminds you of a far better game you could be playing instead.
  2. Modojo
    40
    A strategic card battler that's missing out on any fun, intuitive design, or, worst of all, a point. Stick to your "Advance Wars" and leave this battlefield empty.

Awards & Rankings

44
#44 Best DS Game of 2005
35
#35 Most Discussed DS Game of 2005
31
#31 Most Shared DS Game of 2005

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 17 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 17
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 17
  3. Negative: 2 out of 17
  1. ninjaguy454
    Feb 14, 2021
    8
    There are a variety of words I could use to describe this game. Unique, weird, interesting, addicting, gimmicky, easy. I think each could beThere are a variety of words I could use to describe this game. Unique, weird, interesting, addicting, gimmicky, easy. I think each could be applied based on what someone is looking to get out of it.

    I visited this title 16 years after its release. When I first stumbled upon it, I figured it was something that came out towards the end of the brand's life, somewhere around or after 2010, maybe trying to cash in on the movie. The fact that it came out 5 years prior, at the beginning of the NDS lifespan leveraged it more leeway from me.

    Looking back at the old critic and user reviews it seems as though this was a rather unexpected release for the series. Something that's more of a tie-in spin-off game, as opposed to an adaptation like Sands of Time for the GBA.

    To be fair, who could expect a turn-based strategy game with a couple of twists. Going into it, I certainly didn't expect it, and I immediately became hypercritical... that was until I played the game.

    The gameplay is by no means perfect. It has an 'Advanced Wars' sort of vibe with the familiar Prince of Persia skin pasted over it. I've heard people describe card-game elements about it, but really this extends to the fact that you give orders via a set of dealt playable cards out of a customizable deck.
    The cards can provide buffs to your troops and/or debuffs to enemies with a fair variety and a wide selection of options to choose from. I think it adds more to diversify the combat and works you to be more strategic with more limited options. Although it does add a degree of RNG, I haven't found even the ultra-rare cards to have a game-altering effect where I might've won where I would've lost or vise versa. But that was solely during the single-player campaign, I'm not sure how it would affect multiplayer.

    Overall, I found the gameplay is very addicting, but there are a few concerns or complaints I have about it:
    - First, disable the battle animations.
    Although they're fun to look at, I found them to be too slow and they add little to the gameplay.

    - Second, the campaign felt very easy. Although I had a fun time playing through it, I didn't lose a single scenario and I can't determine if that was due to the poor AI or perhaps just some tilted stats in the player's favor.

    - Lastly, I don't care much for the controls. This was kind of a key giveaway the game was developed early in the console's lifespan (or that I hoped it was). The controls felt like they may have made more sense on a PC, where you have to use the DPAD to cycle through units and choose whether you want to move your view with the stylus. The way the camera moves isn't done via dragging akin to how you navigate a browser sayyy on a smartphone. Moving the stylus instead moves the camera based on which edge of the screen you move it towards. Akin to a strategy game on PC.

    The game did hook me and I would recommend checking it out if you can. I'd love to check out the multiplayer if I could. This is definitely a weird take on the franchise, but I think it has a niche and can definitely occupy someone else who enjoys the genre for a solid 10-20 hours at least.    … Full Review »
  2. EremitaJ
    Aug 4, 2014
    3
    Okay, so let's grab an action game and make an estrategy game out of it. Makes perfect sense, yeah. Oh wait NO IT DOES NOT. Well, I admit I'mOkay, so let's grab an action game and make an estrategy game out of it. Makes perfect sense, yeah. Oh wait NO IT DOES NOT. Well, I admit I'm not kind to strategy games, but come on! It's like making a fighting game of a series of games based around puzzles. I can picture it: PROFESSOR LAYTON VS STREET FIGHTER 4 ULTRA RECHARGED LIMITED EDITION.… Full Review »
  3. Anonymous
    Jul 8, 2007
    5
    It's a very deep, well-thought out game. The only thing that lets it down is brain-dead AI. If they improved that, then I might have It's a very deep, well-thought out game. The only thing that lets it down is brain-dead AI. If they improved that, then I might have played through all the skirmish maps to unlock all the cards, and for fun. However, after beating the campaign, I was bored of the game because it was impossible to lose.… Full Review »
See all user reviews »