Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Bards Tale Trilogy
112 views
Skip to first unread message
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 14, 2018, 8:13:14 PM8/14/18
to
So, InXile released the Bards Tale Trilogy on GOG today. It is a
remastering of the original three games released in the late '80s. I
did not waste any time and immediately bought it. And almost as
quickly I regretted the purchase.
It is not that I do not like the game. I played the hell out of the
original games back in the day. I wrote fan-fiction based on the third
game. If you asked me to list my ten favorite games in 1990, Bards
Tale I and III (sorry Destiny Knight) would have been on that list. I
can STILL remember some of the codes for the magical spells.
And don't get me wrong; there is a lot to like about the Bard Tale
Trilogy remaster. It has the requisite graphics update, which captures
just the right balance between the retro look of the old game without
causing my eyes to bleed with huge pixels. The "3D view" is actually
3D now and - while in no way comparative to the graphics in a modern
RPG - still look pretty damn good. They've added an automap, which is
going to make navigating those spinner-filled dungeons a lot less
tedious. The music and sound effects are very welcome - and needed -
upgrades to the painful bleeps and bloops of the 1985 PC version
(although a part of me still prefers the bleeps of the old Apple II
version I played). And the gameplay is almost entirely untouched from
the originals, and all their unforgiving difficulty. Why yes, my first
party died.
So why am I unhappy with my purchase, you may ask? It's a game I love
coupled with some much needed graphical updates.
Well, there's a variety of reasons. The most obvious is that - despite
being sold as "The Bard's Tale Trilogy", what you get "out of the box"
is just the first game. Bards Tale II and III aren't included; they
are going to be released in late 2018. In fairness, this is mentioned
on the website, but not very obviously. Other features - such as the
"Legacy mode" - which adds to the old-school difficulty - are also
missing.
Then there is the fact that -graphics aside - the developers did the
bare minimum to updating this game. While they added a modicum of
mouse support, the interface is still very archaic; this was a perfect
opportunity to streamline that aspect of the game. While the graphics
are improved, the view window is disappointingly small - unchanged in
size from the 1985 edition - which, coupled with the increased pixel
density - actually makes it harder to see what's going on. The added
journal is sort of pointless (Bards Tale isn't complicated enough to
need one, after all). The GOG edition is also lacking in its normal
goodies - manuals, maps, soundtrack, etc. The map especially is needed
to navigate the mazelike city so its absence is sorely missed.
The thing is, the release feels like a shallow graphical shell running
on top of an old, old game. It's pretty, sure enough, and of course
the core gameplay remains solid (if brutally hard), but I'm not sure
that's worth the $15 bucks I paid. All the more so since the game is
currently missing two-thirds of its content (especially Bards Tale
III, my favorite. Did I mention that I wrote fan fiction for that
game?). Even with the all three games, I still would find it
difficult to say it's worth the price (maybe $5 or $10), but now? It's
just not worth it.
I'm keeping it, though. Overpriced or not, it's still the Bards Tale.
But I /really/ wish I had waited until the price had dropped and the
game was complete.
remastering of the original three games released in the late '80s. I
did not waste any time and immediately bought it. And almost as
quickly I regretted the purchase.
It is not that I do not like the game. I played the hell out of the
original games back in the day. I wrote fan-fiction based on the third
game. If you asked me to list my ten favorite games in 1990, Bards
Tale I and III (sorry Destiny Knight) would have been on that list. I
can STILL remember some of the codes for the magical spells.
And don't get me wrong; there is a lot to like about the Bard Tale
Trilogy remaster. It has the requisite graphics update, which captures
just the right balance between the retro look of the old game without
causing my eyes to bleed with huge pixels. The "3D view" is actually
3D now and - while in no way comparative to the graphics in a modern
RPG - still look pretty damn good. They've added an automap, which is
going to make navigating those spinner-filled dungeons a lot less
tedious. The music and sound effects are very welcome - and needed -
upgrades to the painful bleeps and bloops of the 1985 PC version
(although a part of me still prefers the bleeps of the old Apple II
version I played). And the gameplay is almost entirely untouched from
the originals, and all their unforgiving difficulty. Why yes, my first
party died.
So why am I unhappy with my purchase, you may ask? It's a game I love
coupled with some much needed graphical updates.
Well, there's a variety of reasons. The most obvious is that - despite
being sold as "The Bard's Tale Trilogy", what you get "out of the box"
is just the first game. Bards Tale II and III aren't included; they
are going to be released in late 2018. In fairness, this is mentioned
on the website, but not very obviously. Other features - such as the
"Legacy mode" - which adds to the old-school difficulty - are also
missing.
Then there is the fact that -graphics aside - the developers did the
bare minimum to updating this game. While they added a modicum of
mouse support, the interface is still very archaic; this was a perfect
opportunity to streamline that aspect of the game. While the graphics
are improved, the view window is disappointingly small - unchanged in
size from the 1985 edition - which, coupled with the increased pixel
density - actually makes it harder to see what's going on. The added
journal is sort of pointless (Bards Tale isn't complicated enough to
need one, after all). The GOG edition is also lacking in its normal
goodies - manuals, maps, soundtrack, etc. The map especially is needed
to navigate the mazelike city so its absence is sorely missed.
The thing is, the release feels like a shallow graphical shell running
on top of an old, old game. It's pretty, sure enough, and of course
the core gameplay remains solid (if brutally hard), but I'm not sure
that's worth the $15 bucks I paid. All the more so since the game is
currently missing two-thirds of its content (especially Bards Tale
III, my favorite. Did I mention that I wrote fan fiction for that
game?). Even with the all three games, I still would find it
difficult to say it's worth the price (maybe $5 or $10), but now? It's
just not worth it.
I'm keeping it, though. Overpriced or not, it's still the Bards Tale.
But I /really/ wish I had waited until the price had dropped and the
game was complete.
Mike S.
Aug 16, 2018, 8:46:42 AM8/16/18
to
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 20:12:49 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>So, InXile released the Bards Tale Trilogy on GOG today. It is a
>remastering of the original three games released in the late '80s. I
>did not waste any time and immediately bought it. And almost as
>quickly I regretted the purchase.
Thank you for the head's up on this. I just checked it out. The
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>So, InXile released the Bards Tale Trilogy on GOG today. It is a
>remastering of the original three games released in the late '80s. I
>did not waste any time and immediately bought it. And almost as
>quickly I regretted the purchase.
improved graphics and the automap, especially the automap, is reason
enough for me to give this series another try... when the price drops.
At the moment however, (maybe this remaster will change my opinion) I
don't share your enthusiasm for this series. The first game is fun. I
completed it a few years ago. But the second game annoyed me with too
many spinners, fizzle squares and darkness squares which was screwing
with my maps. Those trap squares seemed to be placed arbitrarily
everywhere. The third game sucked even more because moving your
powerful party over from the previous games leaves little room for
progression. And if you start with a new party, you get sent into a
dungeon which gives you massive EXP at the end of it to get your
characters to the levels they need to be at to deal with the rest of
the game. THIS. IS. LAME.
Add to that the ridiculous amount of combat in the third game, and I
gave up. The Bard's tale is overrated as a series. These old school
dungeon crawlers are better represented by Wizardry and Might & Magic.
I would love to see the early games in those two series get a
remaster.
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 16, 2018, 9:26:08 AM8/16/18
to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 08:46:44 -0400, Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 20:12:49 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
><spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>So, InXile released the Bards Tale Trilogy on GOG today. It is a
>>remastering of the original three games released in the late '80s. I
>>did not waste any time and immediately bought it. And almost as
>>quickly I regretted the purchase.
>
>Thank you for the head's up on this. I just checked it out. The
>improved graphics and the automap, especially the automap, is reason
>enough for me to give this series another try... when the price drops.
Don't get me wrong; I do not hate this game. I'm playing the Bards
Tale remaster (currently grinding my way up to level 14 to get all the
Magician/Sorcerer spells before tackling the real dungeons). The
automap is great (although I later learned that spinners and teleports
do confuse the map and you need to cast a new "scry" spell to
re-orient yourself). And I /love/ the updated graphics (I just wish
the view window was larger).
But the game just isn't worth its current price. It's an /old/ game,
one I've replayed numerous times before. Its updates - while welcome -
aren't /that/ significant either. Even were the game complete, $15
would be pretty steep, especially given that you can get modern games
with better gameplay, more content, less obnoxious interface and nice
graphics for the same price. In part, some of my anger at the price -
and the game - is displaced anger at myself for falling into the
obvious nostalgia trap of buying the game immediately rather than
researching it first, but I still think its fair to say that on
release it is overpriced. Definitely wait until it drops to under $10
$5-8 sounds fair, after the game is complete, if you're a fan. If not,
wait until the inevitable $1.99 super-discount price ;-)
>At the moment however, (maybe this remaster will change my opinion) I
>don't share your enthusiasm for this series. The first game is fun. I
>completed it a few years ago. But the second game annoyed me with too
>many spinners, fizzle squares and darkness squares which was screwing
>with my maps. Those trap squares seemed to be placed arbitrarily
>everywhere. The third game sucked even more because moving your
>powerful party over from the previous games leaves little room for
>progression. And if you start with a new party, you get sent into a
>dungeon which gives you massive EXP at the end of it to get your
>characters to the levels they need to be at to deal with the rest of
>the game. THIS. IS. LAME.
>
>Add to that the ridiculous amount of combat in the third game, and I
>gave up. The Bard's tale is overrated as a series. These old school
>dungeon crawlers are better represented by Wizardry and Might & Magic.
>I would love to see the early games in those two series get a
>remaster.
We'll have to disagree about the third game. The first was a classic,
but it was extremely simple even for its time - wander the mazes and
kill the evil foozle. The second, definitely the weakest of the
trilogy, took the formula of the first and just dumped in more, more
more: never a good practice. It lost the clarity of the original. You
make good points about the third - although I think many of your
issues might have been solved simply by not importing characters - but
failed to note its improvements. It offered a much stronger story (for
a dungeon-crawl CRPG of its time), and a very much appreciated variety
with its multiple worlds. It was also - at the time - a significant
graphic improvement over the first two games, although I doubt that
will be evident in the remaster.
But fair enough; you liked the first more, I liked the third. Let's
play both and ignore Destiny Knight ;-)
wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 20:12:49 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
><spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>So, InXile released the Bards Tale Trilogy on GOG today. It is a
>>remastering of the original three games released in the late '80s. I
>>did not waste any time and immediately bought it. And almost as
>>quickly I regretted the purchase.
>
>Thank you for the head's up on this. I just checked it out. The
>improved graphics and the automap, especially the automap, is reason
>enough for me to give this series another try... when the price drops.
Tale remaster (currently grinding my way up to level 14 to get all the
Magician/Sorcerer spells before tackling the real dungeons). The
automap is great (although I later learned that spinners and teleports
do confuse the map and you need to cast a new "scry" spell to
re-orient yourself). And I /love/ the updated graphics (I just wish
the view window was larger).
But the game just isn't worth its current price. It's an /old/ game,
one I've replayed numerous times before. Its updates - while welcome -
aren't /that/ significant either. Even were the game complete, $15
would be pretty steep, especially given that you can get modern games
with better gameplay, more content, less obnoxious interface and nice
graphics for the same price. In part, some of my anger at the price -
and the game - is displaced anger at myself for falling into the
obvious nostalgia trap of buying the game immediately rather than
researching it first, but I still think its fair to say that on
release it is overpriced. Definitely wait until it drops to under $10
$5-8 sounds fair, after the game is complete, if you're a fan. If not,
wait until the inevitable $1.99 super-discount price ;-)
>At the moment however, (maybe this remaster will change my opinion) I
>don't share your enthusiasm for this series. The first game is fun. I
>completed it a few years ago. But the second game annoyed me with too
>many spinners, fizzle squares and darkness squares which was screwing
>with my maps. Those trap squares seemed to be placed arbitrarily
>everywhere. The third game sucked even more because moving your
>powerful party over from the previous games leaves little room for
>progression. And if you start with a new party, you get sent into a
>dungeon which gives you massive EXP at the end of it to get your
>characters to the levels they need to be at to deal with the rest of
>the game. THIS. IS. LAME.
>
>Add to that the ridiculous amount of combat in the third game, and I
>gave up. The Bard's tale is overrated as a series. These old school
>dungeon crawlers are better represented by Wizardry and Might & Magic.
>I would love to see the early games in those two series get a
>remaster.
but it was extremely simple even for its time - wander the mazes and
kill the evil foozle. The second, definitely the weakest of the
trilogy, took the formula of the first and just dumped in more, more
more: never a good practice. It lost the clarity of the original. You
make good points about the third - although I think many of your
issues might have been solved simply by not importing characters - but
failed to note its improvements. It offered a much stronger story (for
a dungeon-crawl CRPG of its time), and a very much appreciated variety
with its multiple worlds. It was also - at the time - a significant
graphic improvement over the first two games, although I doubt that
will be evident in the remaster.
But fair enough; you liked the first more, I liked the third. Let's
play both and ignore Destiny Knight ;-)
Mike S.
Aug 16, 2018, 1:58:45 PM8/16/18
to
this thread... just to make that clear. I love old school dungeon
crawlers and I was completely unaware of this. Thank you again for
posting about it.
This updated Bard's Tale is also available on Steam with achievements.
Dimensional Traveler
Aug 16, 2018, 3:14:53 PM8/16/18
to
dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Mike S.
Aug 16, 2018, 4:58:02 PM8/16/18
to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 12:14:59 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>Personally I'm of the opinion that if you are going to go "old school
>dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
Wizardry 1 and its wireframe walls is about as old school as I am
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>Personally I'm of the opinion that if you are going to go "old school
>dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
willing to go. :-P I am guessing Rogue is older.
Dimensional Traveler
Aug 16, 2018, 5:06:26 PM8/16/18
to
Zaghadka
Aug 16, 2018, 5:13:28 PM8/16/18
to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 12:14:59 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>On 8/16/2018 10:58 AM, Mike S. wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:25:37 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
>> <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But fair enough; you liked the first more, I liked the third. Let's
>>> play both and ignore Destiny Knight ;-)
>>
>> Despite my complaining in my previous post, I really do appreciate
>> this thread... just to make that clear. I love old school dungeon
>> crawlers and I was completely unaware of this. Thank you again for
>> posting about it.
>>
>> This updated Bard's Tale is also available on Steam with achievements.
>>
>Personally I'm of the opinion that if you are going to go "old school
>dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
Ocasionally yes, I do. I prefer Nethack (now up to v3.6.1!) as a
Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>On 8/16/2018 10:58 AM, Mike S. wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:25:37 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
>> <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But fair enough; you liked the first more, I liked the third. Let's
>>> play both and ignore Destiny Knight ;-)
>>
>> Despite my complaining in my previous post, I really do appreciate
>> this thread... just to make that clear. I love old school dungeon
>> crawlers and I was completely unaware of this. Thank you again for
>> posting about it.
>>
>> This updated Bard's Tale is also available on Steam with achievements.
>>
>Personally I'm of the opinion that if you are going to go "old school
>dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
Roguelike, though. Sometimes I'll run 3.2.3 in DOSBox when I'm feeling
nostalgic (or when I want less of a hard time).
Also, nobody forget Temple of Apshai.
It's so easy to run all these games now that we have great emulators.
I'm totally into this Bard's Tale Trilogy stuff. I also greatly enjoyed
Legend of Grimlock, though that's more of a Dungeon Master/Eye of the
Beholder-alike. Never played Might and Magic and just couldn't get into
Wizardry.
--
Zag
No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten
Mike S.
Aug 16, 2018, 5:15:04 PM8/16/18
to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:06:31 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
Ok, Rogue came out in 1980. Wizardry 1, while worked on in 1980, did
not get released until 1981. So I am *almost* as old school as you
demand I be. ;-P
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
Ok, Rogue came out in 1980. Wizardry 1, while worked on in 1980, did
not get released until 1981. So I am *almost* as old school as you
demand I be. ;-P
Mike S.
Aug 16, 2018, 5:17:37 PM8/16/18
to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 16:13:24 -0500, Zaghadka <zagh...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>Also, nobody forget Temple of Apshai.
The Temple of Apshai Trilogy by Epyx software was one of the very
earliest RPGs I played on my Commodore 64. I loved referring to the
manual to read the room descriptions.
wrote:
>Also, nobody forget Temple of Apshai.
earliest RPGs I played on my Commodore 64. I loved referring to the
manual to read the room descriptions.
Justisaur
Aug 16, 2018, 6:07:55 PM8/16/18
to
Rogue is top-down ASCII characters, not Ahem '3d'. Though you can get tilesets for Nethack to pretty it up.
I actually rather liked Ultima I for that wireframe 3d feel, but I could never get into the sequels.
Telengard was fun for a bit with that kind of 3d and I replayed that fairly recently, but I think it kept me interested only for a day or two.
Temple of Apshai was good when I replayed it last, years after it came out, but that was in 1986 :D
I've got a hankering to dig up Phantasy and replay that, I remember that and PII fondly.
I liked Bards Tale back in the day, but I don't think I could get into it these days. I keep trying Pool of Radiance and can't ever get very far with that, and that's one of my favorite games. I did enjoy the PS 2 remake that was not well received, but then I also liked Fallout:Brotherhood of Steel on the PS2 which was badly panned.
-Justisaur
Phred says Hi!
Dimensional Traveler
Aug 16, 2018, 6:17:20 PM8/16/18
to
it on some fancy new "home computer" you lack cranky old man cred. :P
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 17, 2018, 9:18:39 AM8/17/18
to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 12:14:59 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 8/16/2018 10:58 AM, Mike S. wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:25:37 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
>> <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But fair enough; you liked the first more, I liked the third. Let's
>>> play both and ignore Destiny Knight ;-)
>>
>> Despite my complaining in my previous post, I really do appreciate
>> this thread... just to make that clear. I love old school dungeon
>> crawlers and I was completely unaware of this. Thank you again for
>> posting about it.
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 8/16/2018 10:58 AM, Mike S. wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:25:37 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
>> <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But fair enough; you liked the first more, I liked the third. Let's
>>> play both and ignore Destiny Knight ;-)
>>
>> Despite my complaining in my previous post, I really do appreciate
>> this thread... just to make that clear. I love old school dungeon
>> crawlers and I was completely unaware of this. Thank you again for
>> posting about it.
>Personally I'm of the opinion that if you are going to go "old school
>dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
Bah, Colossal Cave was the first dungeon crawl
>dungeon crawl" you need to go "OLD school dungeon crawl" and play Rogue. :P
(although I admit, I started with Zork ;-)
There's a smell to caves that, every time I encounter it, reminds me
of my first forays into the underworld beneath the little white house.
It's amazing how some memories linger...
Ross Ridge
Aug 17, 2018, 9:43:03 AM8/17/18
to
Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>Add to that the ridiculous amount of combat in the third game, and I
>gave up. The Bard's tale is overrated as a series. These old school
>dungeon crawlers are better represented by Wizardry and Might & Magic.
>I would love to see the early games in those two series get a
>remaster.
When I first saw this Bard's Tale remake show up on Steam my first thought
>Add to that the ridiculous amount of combat in the third game, and I
>gave up. The Bard's tale is overrated as a series. These old school
>dungeon crawlers are better represented by Wizardry and Might & Magic.
>I would love to see the early games in those two series get a
>remaster.
was "Cool, maybe now someone will remake the early Might & Magic games."
--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rridge/
db //
Ant
Aug 17, 2018, 5:08:58 PM8/17/18
to
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 8/16/2018 2:15 PM, Mike S. wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:06:31 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> > <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
> >
> > Ok, Rogue came out in 1980. Wizardry 1, while worked on in 1980, did
> > not get released until 1981. So I am *almost* as old school as you
> > demand I be. ;-P
> >
> Only if you were playing it on a Unix workstation. If you were playing
> it on some fancy new "home computer" you lack cranky old man cred. :P
So, remotely to an UNIX box doesn't count?
> On 8/16/2018 2:15 PM, Mike S. wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:06:31 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> > <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
> >
> > Ok, Rogue came out in 1980. Wizardry 1, while worked on in 1980, did
> > not get released until 1981. So I am *almost* as old school as you
> > demand I be. ;-P
> >
> Only if you were playing it on a Unix workstation. If you were playing
> it on some fancy new "home computer" you lack cranky old man cred. :P
--
Quote of the Week: "Where there is sugar, there are bound to be ants." --Malay Proverb
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )
Ant
Aug 17, 2018, 5:17:45 PM8/17/18
to
reading too much. I did like the graphical action D&D types like
Gauntlet, Gemstone Warrior, Diablo, etc. :P
Dimensional Traveler
Aug 17, 2018, 5:24:32 PM8/17/18
to
On 8/17/2018 2:08 PM, Ant wrote:
> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 8/16/2018 2:15 PM, Mike S. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:06:31 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
>>>
>>> Ok, Rogue came out in 1980. Wizardry 1, while worked on in 1980, did
>>> not get released until 1981. So I am *almost* as old school as you
>>> demand I be. ;-P
>>>
>> Only if you were playing it on a Unix workstation. If you were playing
>> it on some fancy new "home computer" you lack cranky old man cred. :P
>
> So, remotely to an UNIX box doesn't count?
>
Remotely via what? I think my standard is if you weren't subject to
> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 8/16/2018 2:15 PM, Mike S. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:06:31 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
>>>
>>> Ok, Rogue came out in 1980. Wizardry 1, while worked on in 1980, did
>>> not get released until 1981. So I am *almost* as old school as you
>>> demand I be. ;-P
>>>
>> Only if you were playing it on a Unix workstation. If you were playing
>> it on some fancy new "home computer" you lack cranky old man cred. :P
>
> So, remotely to an UNIX box doesn't count?
>
being booted off the system by the sysadmins clearing all the Rogue
players off so they could actually do so real work, it don't count. :P
Mike S.
Aug 17, 2018, 8:26:09 PM8/17/18
to
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 13:43:00 +0000 (UTC), rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
(Ross Ridge) wrote:
>When I first saw this Bard's Tale remake show up on Steam my first thought
>was "Cool, maybe now someone will remake the early Might & Magic games."
You and me both. I don't even think I would even wait for a sale for
(Ross Ridge) wrote:
>When I first saw this Bard's Tale remake show up on Steam my first thought
>was "Cool, maybe now someone will remake the early Might & Magic games."
that one as long as the reviews were good.
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 18, 2018, 9:34:44 AM8/18/18
to
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 20:26:10 -0400, Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Yeah, a remastered Might & Magic 1 & 2 would be great. But hopefully
one that got more effort put into it than Bards Tale. M&M1 especially
needs love; its graphics were - let's lovingly call them "very old
school" - and its interface was terrible (it's usually the latter that
keeps me from replaying the classics; I despise going back to games
where every key on the keyboard has a specific function).
But I have found memories of exploring the dungeons and - more
excitingly - the wilderness of the M&M games. Despite the decades
between them, I see a strange similarity between the gameplay of M&M1
and Skyrim. I love just wandering through the wilds of both games,
never sure what I will encounter, be it some strange monster, a
quest-giver or a hidden dungeon.
Meanwhile, back on the topic: Bard's Tales dungeons are annoying me,
but not enough to get me to quit. The actual gameplay is very grindy;
the dungeons really have no purpose other than to serve out XP and a
few - fairly useless - hints. The level design is terrible; it is just
an endless grid of twisty passages all alike. Thanks to the automap,
the spinners and the teleport traps are bearable (still annoying) but
the areas where no light spells work are just pure tedium.
On the other hand, thanks to the automap I know exactly how much more
of the map I have to explore, which feeds my OCD. I can't quit until
I've explored each and every square.
I honestly cannot imagine how I finished these games back in the day.
I never really mapped the dungeons, instead relying on memory to
navigate (and a lot of random wandering). I am not sure I would have
that ability - or the patience! - were I to try that today (although I
think that has more to do with my being spoiled by better games than
degradation of mental capacity... I hope).
wrote:
one that got more effort put into it than Bards Tale. M&M1 especially
needs love; its graphics were - let's lovingly call them "very old
school" - and its interface was terrible (it's usually the latter that
keeps me from replaying the classics; I despise going back to games
where every key on the keyboard has a specific function).
But I have found memories of exploring the dungeons and - more
excitingly - the wilderness of the M&M games. Despite the decades
between them, I see a strange similarity between the gameplay of M&M1
and Skyrim. I love just wandering through the wilds of both games,
never sure what I will encounter, be it some strange monster, a
quest-giver or a hidden dungeon.
Meanwhile, back on the topic: Bard's Tales dungeons are annoying me,
but not enough to get me to quit. The actual gameplay is very grindy;
the dungeons really have no purpose other than to serve out XP and a
few - fairly useless - hints. The level design is terrible; it is just
an endless grid of twisty passages all alike. Thanks to the automap,
the spinners and the teleport traps are bearable (still annoying) but
the areas where no light spells work are just pure tedium.
On the other hand, thanks to the automap I know exactly how much more
of the map I have to explore, which feeds my OCD. I can't quit until
I've explored each and every square.
I honestly cannot imagine how I finished these games back in the day.
I never really mapped the dungeons, instead relying on memory to
navigate (and a lot of random wandering). I am not sure I would have
that ability - or the patience! - were I to try that today (although I
think that has more to do with my being spoiled by better games than
degradation of mental capacity... I hope).
Mike S.
Aug 19, 2018, 9:30:28 AM8/19/18
to
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 09:34:08 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Meanwhile, back on the topic: Bard's Tales dungeons are annoying me,
>but not enough to get me to quit. The actual gameplay is very grindy;
>the dungeons really have no purpose other than to serve out XP and a
>few - fairly useless - hints. The level design is terrible; it is just
>an endless grid of twisty passages all alike. Thanks to the automap,
>the spinners and the teleport traps are bearable (still annoying) but
>the areas where no light spells work are just pure tedium.
>
>On the other hand, thanks to the automap I know exactly how much more
>of the map I have to explore, which feeds my OCD. I can't quit until
>I've explored each and every square.
>
>I honestly cannot imagine how I finished these games back in the day.
>I never really mapped the dungeons, instead relying on memory to
>navigate (and a lot of random wandering). I am not sure I would have
>that ability - or the patience! - were I to try that today (although I
>think that has more to do with my being spoiled by better games than
>degradation of mental capacity... I hope).
The trap squares become a far bigger problem in BT 2. They are all
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Meanwhile, back on the topic: Bard's Tales dungeons are annoying me,
>but not enough to get me to quit. The actual gameplay is very grindy;
>the dungeons really have no purpose other than to serve out XP and a
>few - fairly useless - hints. The level design is terrible; it is just
>an endless grid of twisty passages all alike. Thanks to the automap,
>the spinners and the teleport traps are bearable (still annoying) but
>the areas where no light spells work are just pure tedium.
>
>On the other hand, thanks to the automap I know exactly how much more
>of the map I have to explore, which feeds my OCD. I can't quit until
>I've explored each and every square.
>
>I honestly cannot imagine how I finished these games back in the day.
>I never really mapped the dungeons, instead relying on memory to
>navigate (and a lot of random wandering). I am not sure I would have
>that ability - or the patience! - were I to try that today (although I
>think that has more to do with my being spoiled by better games than
>degradation of mental capacity... I hope).
over the goddamn place, seemingly randomly.
Does the automap update as you move or are you seeing the whole thing
at once? Can you make notes on it? Does it show all the various trap
squares?
Ross Ridge
Aug 19, 2018, 11:00:29 AM8/19/18
to
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>Remotely via what? I think my standard is if you weren't subject to
>being booted off the system by the sysadmins clearing all the Rogue
>players off so they could actually do so real work, it don't count. :P
We used to have to boot people playing Moria off our CS club computer
>Remotely via what? I think my standard is if you weren't subject to
>being booted off the system by the sysadmins clearing all the Rogue
>players off so they could actually do so real work, it don't count. :P
because we only had enough RAM for a couple of people to play it at
the same time. Nethack on the other hand wasn't a problem, which was
interesting because they both used about 1M of memory.
The reason why we could have more people playing Nethack was because
it was about 700k code and 300k data, while Moria was about 300k code
and 700k data. Since code could be shared between processes but data
couldn't be this meant that 4 people playing Nethack would only use
about 2M of memory (700k + 300k * 4), while 4 people playing Moria needed
over 3M (300k + 700k * 4).
It was actually kind of funny watching three people trying to play Moria
at the same time. Since there was only enough RAM for two games to be
running at the same time the operating system would swap out one of the
Moria processes to make room for the other two. (The computer didn't
support page-based virtual memory which would've let it swap out just
parts of the processes.) So you'd see two people happily playing Moria
while the game was frozen for the third person. When the operating
system choose to change which process was swapped out, one of the
players would groan while another would start happily playing again.
That would happen every 10 seconds or so until one of the players gave up.
Michael Romes
Aug 19, 2018, 2:21:04 PM8/19/18
to
Am 15.08.2018 um 02:12 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
...
> Then there is the fact that -graphics aside - the developers did the
> bare minimum to updating this game. While they added a modicum of
> mouse support, the interface is still very archaic; this was a perfect
> opportunity to streamline that aspect of the game.
Especially as the BT1 - 3 are using the engine of the new BT4 which to
me is hilarious (having played the first 2 on my C-64) as that means
that they now require at least Windows 7...
> The GOG edition is also lacking in its normal
> goodies - manuals, maps, soundtrack, etc. The map especially is needed
> to navigate the mazelike city so its absence is sorely missed.
That URL to those is mentioned on InXiles forum there:
https://forums.inxile-entertainment.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=19179
https://bardstaleonline.com/bards-tale-remastered/downloads
> The thing is, the release feels like a shallow graphical shell running
> on top of an old, old game. It's pretty, sure enough, and of course
> the core gameplay remains solid (if brutally hard), but I'm not sure
> that's worth the $15 bucks I paid. All the more so since the game is
> currently missing two-thirds of its content (especially Bards Tale
> III, my favorite. Did I mention that I wrote fan fiction for that
> game?). Even with the all three games, I still would find it
> difficult to say it's worth the price (maybe $5 or $10), but now? It's
> just not worth it.
>
> I'm keeping it, though. Overpriced or not, it's still the Bards Tale.
> But I /really/ wish I had waited until the price had dropped and the
> game was complete.
I got it for free as a backer of Bards Tale IV on Kickstarter so I can’t
complain ;-)
...
> Then there is the fact that -graphics aside - the developers did the
> bare minimum to updating this game. While they added a modicum of
> mouse support, the interface is still very archaic; this was a perfect
> opportunity to streamline that aspect of the game.
me is hilarious (having played the first 2 on my C-64) as that means
that they now require at least Windows 7...
> The GOG edition is also lacking in its normal
> goodies - manuals, maps, soundtrack, etc. The map especially is needed
> to navigate the mazelike city so its absence is sorely missed.
https://forums.inxile-entertainment.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=19179
https://bardstaleonline.com/bards-tale-remastered/downloads
> The thing is, the release feels like a shallow graphical shell running
> on top of an old, old game. It's pretty, sure enough, and of course
> the core gameplay remains solid (if brutally hard), but I'm not sure
> that's worth the $15 bucks I paid. All the more so since the game is
> currently missing two-thirds of its content (especially Bards Tale
> III, my favorite. Did I mention that I wrote fan fiction for that
> game?). Even with the all three games, I still would find it
> difficult to say it's worth the price (maybe $5 or $10), but now? It's
> just not worth it.
>
> I'm keeping it, though. Overpriced or not, it's still the Bards Tale.
> But I /really/ wish I had waited until the price had dropped and the
> game was complete.
complain ;-)
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 20, 2018, 9:42:51 AM8/20/18
to
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:30:31 -0400, Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 09:34:08 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
><spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Meanwhile, back on the topic: Bard's Tales dungeons are annoying me,
>>but not enough to get me to quit. The actual gameplay is very grindy;
>>the dungeons really have no purpose other than to serve out XP and a
>>few - fairly useless - hints. The level design is terrible; it is just
>>an endless grid of twisty passages all alike. Thanks to the automap,
>>the spinners and the teleport traps are bearable (still annoying) but
>>the areas where no light spells work are just pure tedium.
>>
>>On the other hand, thanks to the automap I know exactly how much more
>>of the map I have to explore, which feeds my OCD. I can't quit until
>>I've explored each and every square.
>>
>>I honestly cannot imagine how I finished these games back in the day.
>>I never really mapped the dungeons, instead relying on memory to
>>navigate (and a lot of random wandering). I am not sure I would have
>>that ability - or the patience! - were I to try that today (although I
>>think that has more to do with my being spoiled by better games than
>>degradation of mental capacity... I hope).
>
>The trap squares become a far bigger problem in BT 2. They are all
>over the goddamn place, seemingly randomly.
Well, that was the problem of Destiny Knight; it was just more - much
more - of everything that made Bards Tale 1 fun without any thought as
to why that game was fun in the first place.
>Does the automap update as you move or are you seeing the whole thing
>at once? Can you make notes on it? Does it show all the various trap
>squares?
There are actually two modes for the automap. There is a smaller map
on the main game interface that shows a radius of about four tiles
around the player, and a larger map of the entire level accessible via
the journal. The larger map is useful for orienting yourself, but you
can't actually move around while looking at it; the smaller map on the
HUD gives you a general idea of what is in your vicinity.
The map updates as you walk around. You can see two or three squares
around you and the map reflects this, so you don't actually have to
touch each tile (although since some tiles contain hints or encounters
you /must/ trigger, it pays to step on each one. Fortunately, the
automap also indicates which maps you have actually walked on and
which ones you have just seen. The automap also has icons for spinner,
teleport and darkness traps, as well as icons for forced encounters,
physical traps, and the various "journal entries" (e.g., the various
scribblings you find on the dungeon walls that pass for hints and
story in Bards Tale).
The automap does make the game much less tedious, but it isn't a
complete cheat. Whenever you get teleported, or trigger a darkness or
spinner trap, the map gets "confused" - indicated by a ? on the HUD
where the automap usually is - and it no longer updates automatically.
You have to use a ScrySite spell to locate yourself before it starts
working again (this is honest to how it was done in the original,
although ScrySite in the 1985 version just gave you map co-ordinates).
You can also use the big automap in the journal to teleport around the
map. Again, this is less "cheaty" than you might think; the 1985
edition had a similar feature. Of course, in the original game, you
had to specify co-ordinates, but in this remaster it's all
point-n-click.
The automap is the best thing about the remaster. The dungeons of the
original game were stupidly mazelike; they had absolutely no rhyme or
reason to them (with a few exceptions) and exploring them was tedious
beyond belief. You literally had to visit every tile to ensure you
weren't missing anything, and the spinner, darkness and teleport traps
made this task an annoying challenge. It became a chore of taking a
step, casting ScrySite to get your co-ordinates (to make sure you
weren't teleported), and then repeating until the map was complete. It
was tedious, and the automap removes a lot of this uninteresting
busy-work. I'm sure purists will be horrified but I'm very
appreciative of the addition.
wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 09:34:08 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
><spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Meanwhile, back on the topic: Bard's Tales dungeons are annoying me,
>>but not enough to get me to quit. The actual gameplay is very grindy;
>>the dungeons really have no purpose other than to serve out XP and a
>>few - fairly useless - hints. The level design is terrible; it is just
>>an endless grid of twisty passages all alike. Thanks to the automap,
>>the spinners and the teleport traps are bearable (still annoying) but
>>the areas where no light spells work are just pure tedium.
>>
>>On the other hand, thanks to the automap I know exactly how much more
>>of the map I have to explore, which feeds my OCD. I can't quit until
>>I've explored each and every square.
>>
>>I honestly cannot imagine how I finished these games back in the day.
>>I never really mapped the dungeons, instead relying on memory to
>>navigate (and a lot of random wandering). I am not sure I would have
>>that ability - or the patience! - were I to try that today (although I
>>think that has more to do with my being spoiled by better games than
>>degradation of mental capacity... I hope).
>
>The trap squares become a far bigger problem in BT 2. They are all
>over the goddamn place, seemingly randomly.
more - of everything that made Bards Tale 1 fun without any thought as
to why that game was fun in the first place.
>Does the automap update as you move or are you seeing the whole thing
>at once? Can you make notes on it? Does it show all the various trap
>squares?
on the main game interface that shows a radius of about four tiles
around the player, and a larger map of the entire level accessible via
the journal. The larger map is useful for orienting yourself, but you
can't actually move around while looking at it; the smaller map on the
HUD gives you a general idea of what is in your vicinity.
The map updates as you walk around. You can see two or three squares
around you and the map reflects this, so you don't actually have to
touch each tile (although since some tiles contain hints or encounters
you /must/ trigger, it pays to step on each one. Fortunately, the
automap also indicates which maps you have actually walked on and
which ones you have just seen. The automap also has icons for spinner,
teleport and darkness traps, as well as icons for forced encounters,
physical traps, and the various "journal entries" (e.g., the various
scribblings you find on the dungeon walls that pass for hints and
story in Bards Tale).
The automap does make the game much less tedious, but it isn't a
complete cheat. Whenever you get teleported, or trigger a darkness or
spinner trap, the map gets "confused" - indicated by a ? on the HUD
where the automap usually is - and it no longer updates automatically.
You have to use a ScrySite spell to locate yourself before it starts
working again (this is honest to how it was done in the original,
although ScrySite in the 1985 version just gave you map co-ordinates).
You can also use the big automap in the journal to teleport around the
map. Again, this is less "cheaty" than you might think; the 1985
edition had a similar feature. Of course, in the original game, you
had to specify co-ordinates, but in this remaster it's all
point-n-click.
The automap is the best thing about the remaster. The dungeons of the
original game were stupidly mazelike; they had absolutely no rhyme or
reason to them (with a few exceptions) and exploring them was tedious
beyond belief. You literally had to visit every tile to ensure you
weren't missing anything, and the spinner, darkness and teleport traps
made this task an annoying challenge. It became a chore of taking a
step, casting ScrySite to get your co-ordinates (to make sure you
weren't teleported), and then repeating until the map was complete. It
was tedious, and the automap removes a lot of this uninteresting
busy-work. I'm sure purists will be horrified but I'm very
appreciative of the addition.
Mike S.
Aug 20, 2018, 4:54:23 PM8/20/18
to
Justisaur
Aug 21, 2018, 7:38:49 PM8/21/18
to
Werner Punz
Aug 23, 2018, 2:45:36 PM8/23/18
to
Am 16.08.18 um 23:13 schrieb Zaghadka:
If you like those games and have VR then give The Mages Tale a shot,
it is basically a 10 hour dungeon romp in the Bards Tale universe, but
closer to Ultima Underworld than any Bards Tale game.
Highly recommended, definitely one of the best games on the Rift and
totally overlooked.
it is basically a 10 hour dungeon romp in the Bards Tale universe, but
closer to Ultima Underworld than any Bards Tale game.
Highly recommended, definitely one of the best games on the Rift and
totally overlooked.
Werner Punz
Aug 23, 2018, 2:46:19 PM8/23/18
to
Am 17.08.18 um 15:18 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
> ah, Colossal Cave was the first dungeon crawl
> (although I admit, I started with Zork;-)
>
> There's a smell to caves that, every time I encounter it, reminds me
> of my first forays into the underworld beneath the little white house.
> It's amazing how some memories linger..
You just have been eaten by a Grue...
> (although I admit, I started with Zork;-)
>
> There's a smell to caves that, every time I encounter it, reminds me
> of my first forays into the underworld beneath the little white house.
> It's amazing how some memories linger..
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 24, 2018, 8:51:35 AM8/24/18
to
(although I believe he was specifically coded so he wouldn't steal it.
He's bypassed his programmed restrictions; Skynet confirmed!)
Having finished Bards Tale (with a little help, those later dungeons
swathed in darkness were the absolute worst!), I really wish the
Trilogy had been released complete.
Even more, I wish somebody would give Dragon Wars the same treatment
as Bards Tale. That game, for me, was the apex of tile-based
dungeon-crawlers. It's actually still rather playable today (it even
has an automap!) and its visuals hold up in that old-school retro-way
but I wouldn't mind a revamp.
Werner Punz
Aug 24, 2018, 4:11:16 PM8/24/18
to
Am 24.08.18 um 14:51 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
Well I would love to see Ultima 4-8 overhauled and maybe in 3d.
Also U9 would need a decent treatment with the original storyline.
But speaking of Ultima I guess we can call 2018 the year Ultima has once
and forall died. After EA basically tried a mobile phone Ultima 4 with
lootboxes, RG tried to sell his Ultima successor to the Ultima crowd as
single player RPG with cooperative multiplayer and then ended up in his
usual failing mmrpg shennanigans, this time selling overpriced virtual
properties and items to people. I guess that was the final nail into the
coffin for classic single Ultima and whatever RG thought could be a
succession to it.
Well sorry Ultima is not entirely dead yet, Underworld lives on...
Also U9 would need a decent treatment with the original storyline.
But speaking of Ultima I guess we can call 2018 the year Ultima has once
and forall died. After EA basically tried a mobile phone Ultima 4 with
lootboxes, RG tried to sell his Ultima successor to the Ultima crowd as
single player RPG with cooperative multiplayer and then ended up in his
usual failing mmrpg shennanigans, this time selling overpriced virtual
properties and items to people. I guess that was the final nail into the
coffin for classic single Ultima and whatever RG thought could be a
succession to it.
Well sorry Ultima is not entirely dead yet, Underworld lives on...
Werner Punz
Aug 24, 2018, 4:13:55 PM8/24/18
to
Am 24.08.18 um 22:11 schrieb Werner Punz:
>>
> Well I would love to see Ultima 4-8 overhauled and maybe in 3d.
> Also U9 would need a decent treatment with the original storyline.
>
> But speaking of Ultima I guess we can call 2018 the year Ultima has once
> and forall died. After EA basically tried a mobile phone Ultima 4 with
> lootboxes, RG tried to sell his Ultima successor to the Ultima crowd as
> single player RPG with cooperative multiplayer and then ended up in his
> usual failing mmrpg shennanigans, this time selling overpriced virtual
> properties and items to people. I guess that was the final nail into the
> coffin for classic single Ultima and whatever RG thought could be a
> succession to it.
>
> Well sorry Ultima is not entirely dead yet, Underworld lives on...
>
>
Well just to add a few thoughts. Ultima is like the Amiga of RPGs, once
groundbreaking it crawls nowadays up every few years and everyone trying
to touch it, seems to not get it at all or does not even want to know
what the fans want and ends up yet in another fiasco of trying to cash
in on some money from nostalgia.
I really hope that the ex Looking Glass guys can pull of a decent
Underworld Successor with their Underworld sequel.
>>
> Well I would love to see Ultima 4-8 overhauled and maybe in 3d.
> Also U9 would need a decent treatment with the original storyline.
>
> But speaking of Ultima I guess we can call 2018 the year Ultima has once
> and forall died. After EA basically tried a mobile phone Ultima 4 with
> lootboxes, RG tried to sell his Ultima successor to the Ultima crowd as
> single player RPG with cooperative multiplayer and then ended up in his
> usual failing mmrpg shennanigans, this time selling overpriced virtual
> properties and items to people. I guess that was the final nail into the
> coffin for classic single Ultima and whatever RG thought could be a
> succession to it.
>
> Well sorry Ultima is not entirely dead yet, Underworld lives on...
>
>
groundbreaking it crawls nowadays up every few years and everyone trying
to touch it, seems to not get it at all or does not even want to know
what the fans want and ends up yet in another fiasco of trying to cash
in on some money from nostalgia.
I really hope that the ex Looking Glass guys can pull of a decent
Underworld Successor with their Underworld sequel.
Mike S.
Aug 25, 2018, 8:24:32 AM8/25/18
to
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 08:51:18 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Even more, I wish somebody would give Dragon Wars the same treatment
>as Bards Tale. That game, for me, was the apex of tile-based
>dungeon-crawlers. It's actually still rather playable today (it even
>has an automap!) and its visuals hold up in that old-school retro-way
>but I wouldn't mind a revamp.
I never played Dragon Wars but I think I remember it combines aspects
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Even more, I wish somebody would give Dragon Wars the same treatment
>as Bards Tale. That game, for me, was the apex of tile-based
>dungeon-crawlers. It's actually still rather playable today (it even
>has an automap!) and its visuals hold up in that old-school retro-way
>but I wouldn't mind a revamp.
from both Bard's Tale and Wasteland. I would play a revamp of that one
for sure. But I am personally hoping that Might & Magic 1 and 2 will
get this remaster treatment one day soon.
Spalls Hurgenson
Aug 25, 2018, 9:30:32 AM8/25/18
to
On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:24:42 -0400, Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>I never played Dragon Wars but I think I remember it combines aspects
>from both Bard's Tale and Wasteland. I would play a revamp of that one
>for sure. But I am personally hoping that Might & Magic 1 and 2 will
>get this remaster treatment one day soon.
Dragon Wars started out as Bards Tale 4, but a falling out between
developer and publisher resulted in the game going in a different
direction. That relationship was already on the rocks during Bards
Tale 3, and some of the neater features of Dragon Wars were
intentionally held back so DW would look that much better in
comparison. There have been on-again/off-again rumors of a kickstarted
Dragon Wars 2 but nothing ever really comes of it.
As I stated in an earlier thread, I would love a Might & Magic 1 & 2
remaster, but I'm not holding my breath. M&M1 would require A LOT of
work to bring up to snuff; it's extremely text-heavy, for one thing,
and its interface is arcane. Although honestly, I think I'd still play
it if they just got rid of the ear-piercing PC speaker beeps-n-boops.
I find THAT far more annoying than the most garish CGA graphics or
hundred-key control-scheme.
(And responding to another post in this thread:
I am a huge Ultima fan but I've pretty much given up on any sort of
revival. Even with its most popular modern IPs, EA can't help but drag
them into the mud; I have no confidence they'd be any more capable
with their stable of legacy properties. EA is less interested in
making interesting games than monetizing everything regardless of how
it affects the overall experience, as was witnessed with their most
recent flirtations with Ultima.
Meanwhile, Shroud of the Avatar seemed more intent on trying to
duplicate the feel and magic (and profitability?) of Ultima Online
rather than the more story-based core games, and while that sort of
game appeals to some, it left me feeling cold.
Similarly, Underworld: Ascendant looks likewise disappointing. It
seems more interested in its environmental traps and box-stacking
physics than in creating an appealing and immersive story and world.
Everytime they show off another video the game drops lower and lower
on my "must buy" list.
Still, it is remarkable how well the old Ultima games hold up. Ultima
Underworld is still a fantastic experience, and Ultima 7 / 7.5 still
impress with how modern their interfaces and gameplay feel. Even
Ultima 8 - shallow as its gameplay is - is a far more enjoyable game
with gigahertz of computing power pushing its otherwise sluggish
engine towards something nearing playability. The older games have
aged more apparently, but the love of fans have mitigated this
somewhat; III and IV have received engine-upgrades, adding (slightly)
improved graphics and sound, while V was completely rebuilt using the
Dungeon Siege engine. Honestly, just give me a way to play Underworld
full-screen and I'll be happy. )
wrote:
>I never played Dragon Wars but I think I remember it combines aspects
>from both Bard's Tale and Wasteland. I would play a revamp of that one
>for sure. But I am personally hoping that Might & Magic 1 and 2 will
>get this remaster treatment one day soon.
developer and publisher resulted in the game going in a different
direction. That relationship was already on the rocks during Bards
Tale 3, and some of the neater features of Dragon Wars were
intentionally held back so DW would look that much better in
comparison. There have been on-again/off-again rumors of a kickstarted
Dragon Wars 2 but nothing ever really comes of it.
As I stated in an earlier thread, I would love a Might & Magic 1 & 2
remaster, but I'm not holding my breath. M&M1 would require A LOT of
work to bring up to snuff; it's extremely text-heavy, for one thing,
and its interface is arcane. Although honestly, I think I'd still play
it if they just got rid of the ear-piercing PC speaker beeps-n-boops.
I find THAT far more annoying than the most garish CGA graphics or
hundred-key control-scheme.
(And responding to another post in this thread:
I am a huge Ultima fan but I've pretty much given up on any sort of
revival. Even with its most popular modern IPs, EA can't help but drag
them into the mud; I have no confidence they'd be any more capable
with their stable of legacy properties. EA is less interested in
making interesting games than monetizing everything regardless of how
it affects the overall experience, as was witnessed with their most
recent flirtations with Ultima.
Meanwhile, Shroud of the Avatar seemed more intent on trying to
duplicate the feel and magic (and profitability?) of Ultima Online
rather than the more story-based core games, and while that sort of
game appeals to some, it left me feeling cold.
Similarly, Underworld: Ascendant looks likewise disappointing. It
seems more interested in its environmental traps and box-stacking
physics than in creating an appealing and immersive story and world.
Everytime they show off another video the game drops lower and lower
on my "must buy" list.
Still, it is remarkable how well the old Ultima games hold up. Ultima
Underworld is still a fantastic experience, and Ultima 7 / 7.5 still
impress with how modern their interfaces and gameplay feel. Even
Ultima 8 - shallow as its gameplay is - is a far more enjoyable game
with gigahertz of computing power pushing its otherwise sluggish
engine towards something nearing playability. The older games have
aged more apparently, but the love of fans have mitigated this
somewhat; III and IV have received engine-upgrades, adding (slightly)
improved graphics and sound, while V was completely rebuilt using the
Dungeon Siege engine. Honestly, just give me a way to play Underworld
full-screen and I'll be happy. )
Werner Punz
Aug 25, 2018, 10:08:57 AM8/25/18
to
Am 25.08.18 um 15:30 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
multiplayer ultima 4 which just was a vehicle to sell lootboxes en
masse. The game thankfully died after 6 months and probably smeared the
name Ultima worse than even SOTA or U9 did.
> Meanwhile, Shroud of the Avatar seemed more intent on trying to
> duplicate the feel and magic (and profitability?) of Ultima Online
> rather than the more story-based core games, and while that sort of
> game appeals to some, it left me feeling cold.
>
Well frankly spoken. From a moral POV Richard Garriot blatantly lied
when he raised the money. He basically sold the game as a deep single
player experience with lots of decisions and story and a mild
multiplayer on top. Sort of what Larian does with their excellent
Divinity Original Sin series. After the kickstarter ended 1-2 months
later, suddenly the emphasis was multiplayer and typically for Garriot
another attemt to run another MMRPG scheme he seems to be fixated on
since his only online success UO, single player suddnly just was sort of
an afterthought.
Things became worse after Roberts hit the jackpot with Star Citizen the
now mmrpg suddenly became an unfinished big overprised in game goods
shop with a semi existent story but lots of grinding.
Valid criticism from fans was ignored, people giving well thought out
critics in their forums were banned.
The end now is a game which has a few hundred concurrent players and
soon will be dead - the sooner the better I must say. Garriot probably
now has finally buried Ultima in any form forever. Giving that he raised
a huge sum over Kickstarter and crowdfunding shows that the interest in
the franchise still is there, it just should not be raped over and over
again by the stakeholders involved.
> Similarly, Underworld: Ascendant looks likewise disappointing. It
> seems more interested in its environmental traps and box-stacking
> physics than in creating an appealing and immersive story and world.
> Everytime they show off another video the game drops lower and lower
> on my "must buy" list.
>
The verdict still is open on that one. It can become good or it can be a
stinker, lets wait and see. Most people forget that there already was a
really good "Underworld 3" - Arx Fatalis which basically kickstarted the
now famous Arkane Studios.
> Still, it is remarkable how well the old Ultima games hold up. Ultima
> Underworld is still a fantastic experience, and Ultima 7 / 7.5 still
> impress with how modern their interfaces and gameplay feel. Even
> Ultima 8 - shallow as its gameplay is - is a far more enjoyable game
> with gigahertz of computing power pushing its otherwise sluggish
> engine towards something nearing playability. The older games have
> aged more apparently, but the love of fans have mitigated this
> somewhat; III and IV have received engine-upgrades, adding (slightly)
> improved graphics and sound, while V was completely rebuilt using the
> Dungeon Siege engine. Honestly, just give me a way to play Underworld
> full-screen and I'll be happy. )
>
Well Ultima 7 shows its age. Storywise it still is among the best there
is, which other RPG has a murder story with a weird religion connected
to it run by the main villain (some glodlike being toying with you
constantly)
The problem in u7 is the engine itself, fights are basically press f and
hope you survive, micro management while with later patches becoming
better still is annoying to some degree (feed me avatar)
But the crafting was second to none for decades and the realism
regarding the npcs was also never again reached until a few years ago.
Ultima 8, I never played the Super Mario avatar version, I liked it, it
simply was unfinished.
Ultima 9... oh well Garriot started his I have an idea and wont listen
to anybody and then overpromise and underdeliver buggy shoddy games with
it he still has that career until today.
Ultima 9 in its original form which was axed thanks to UO would have
been awesome, but oh well...
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:24:42 -0400, Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
> I am a huge Ultima fan but I've pretty much given up on any sort of
> revival. Even with its most popular modern IPs, EA can't help but drag
> them into the mud; I have no confidence they'd be any more capable
> with their stable of legacy properties. EA is less interested in
> making interesting games than monetizing everything regardless of how
> it affects the overall experience, as was witnessed with their most
> recent flirtations with Ultima.
>
Yeah as on old Ultima fan it really hurts what EA did... a mobile phone
> wrote:
>
> I am a huge Ultima fan but I've pretty much given up on any sort of
> revival. Even with its most popular modern IPs, EA can't help but drag
> them into the mud; I have no confidence they'd be any more capable
> with their stable of legacy properties. EA is less interested in
> making interesting games than monetizing everything regardless of how
> it affects the overall experience, as was witnessed with their most
> recent flirtations with Ultima.
>
multiplayer ultima 4 which just was a vehicle to sell lootboxes en
masse. The game thankfully died after 6 months and probably smeared the
name Ultima worse than even SOTA or U9 did.
> Meanwhile, Shroud of the Avatar seemed more intent on trying to
> duplicate the feel and magic (and profitability?) of Ultima Online
> rather than the more story-based core games, and while that sort of
> game appeals to some, it left me feeling cold.
>
when he raised the money. He basically sold the game as a deep single
player experience with lots of decisions and story and a mild
multiplayer on top. Sort of what Larian does with their excellent
Divinity Original Sin series. After the kickstarter ended 1-2 months
later, suddenly the emphasis was multiplayer and typically for Garriot
another attemt to run another MMRPG scheme he seems to be fixated on
since his only online success UO, single player suddnly just was sort of
an afterthought.
Things became worse after Roberts hit the jackpot with Star Citizen the
now mmrpg suddenly became an unfinished big overprised in game goods
shop with a semi existent story but lots of grinding.
Valid criticism from fans was ignored, people giving well thought out
critics in their forums were banned.
The end now is a game which has a few hundred concurrent players and
soon will be dead - the sooner the better I must say. Garriot probably
now has finally buried Ultima in any form forever. Giving that he raised
a huge sum over Kickstarter and crowdfunding shows that the interest in
the franchise still is there, it just should not be raped over and over
again by the stakeholders involved.
> Similarly, Underworld: Ascendant looks likewise disappointing. It
> seems more interested in its environmental traps and box-stacking
> physics than in creating an appealing and immersive story and world.
> Everytime they show off another video the game drops lower and lower
> on my "must buy" list.
>
stinker, lets wait and see. Most people forget that there already was a
really good "Underworld 3" - Arx Fatalis which basically kickstarted the
now famous Arkane Studios.
> Still, it is remarkable how well the old Ultima games hold up. Ultima
> Underworld is still a fantastic experience, and Ultima 7 / 7.5 still
> impress with how modern their interfaces and gameplay feel. Even
> Ultima 8 - shallow as its gameplay is - is a far more enjoyable game
> with gigahertz of computing power pushing its otherwise sluggish
> engine towards something nearing playability. The older games have
> aged more apparently, but the love of fans have mitigated this
> somewhat; III and IV have received engine-upgrades, adding (slightly)
> improved graphics and sound, while V was completely rebuilt using the
> Dungeon Siege engine. Honestly, just give me a way to play Underworld
> full-screen and I'll be happy. )
>
is, which other RPG has a murder story with a weird religion connected
to it run by the main villain (some glodlike being toying with you
constantly)
The problem in u7 is the engine itself, fights are basically press f and
hope you survive, micro management while with later patches becoming
better still is annoying to some degree (feed me avatar)
But the crafting was second to none for decades and the realism
regarding the npcs was also never again reached until a few years ago.
Ultima 8, I never played the Super Mario avatar version, I liked it, it
simply was unfinished.
Ultima 9... oh well Garriot started his I have an idea and wont listen
to anybody and then overpromise and underdeliver buggy shoddy games with
it he still has that career until today.
Ultima 9 in its original form which was axed thanks to UO would have
been awesome, but oh well...
Xocyll
Aug 25, 2018, 8:12:16 PM8/25/18
to
Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> looked up from reading the entrails of the
porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
I have to vigorously disagree with this.
Arx Fatalis was full of bugs and issues.
Levitation where you could only float level so you couldn't go where you
needed since you were 1cm too low.
The casting method with gestures which was problematic at best and just
fucking did not work at all at worst.
Various game killing story bugs that derailed side quests and the main
quest beyond repair, effectively ending the game.
UUW 1+2 on the other hand were utterly bug free by comparison.
Note that "by comparison" part, they weren't bug free at all but
compared to AF they were.
Take off your rose colored glasses Werner.
Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
Arx Fatalis was full of bugs and issues.
Levitation where you could only float level so you couldn't go where you
needed since you were 1cm too low.
The casting method with gestures which was problematic at best and just
fucking did not work at all at worst.
Various game killing story bugs that derailed side quests and the main
quest beyond repair, effectively ending the game.
UUW 1+2 on the other hand were utterly bug free by comparison.
Note that "by comparison" part, they weren't bug free at all but
compared to AF they were.
Take off your rose colored glasses Werner.
Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
0 new messages