Death Gate game and books
Kevin Murnane
in relation to the series of books. I am currently midway through
the 6th book and am also fairly early in the game (early Pryan - the
second world visited). I began the books as preparation for the
game. I expected to find the books formulaic and tedious and
thought I would read one to get an idea of Gameworld and then
play the game. Much to my surprise I found the books very enjoyable.
Playing the game while reading the books is interesting. On the
one hand it is very enjoyable to be playing a game in a world that
I am currently immersed in in my reading. On the other hand, the
discrepancies between the game and the books can be jarring at
times. On the whole, the game does a fairly good job of capturing
the theme of the books as well as many of the details. Obviously,
the richness of the worlds created in the books is lacking in the
game. Also, several of the characters in the game are only pale
shadows of the characters in the book with the same name. For
example, Limbeck is merely a dwarf who sits at a desk and writes
speeches and who has some things you need in the game (note
that this character may be fleshed out in more detail later in
the game). It appears to me at this point that the game is
telling a similar story using a different story-line.
Having read the books is not necessary for playing the game. In
most circumstances knowledge from the books enriches the gaming
experience and in some cases it detracts from the gaming experience
because of inconsistencies. I have not yet come across any
puzzles that are made easier because of knowledge gleaned from
the books. Through extensive conversations the game does a
good job of providing a lot of background from the books. My
wife and daughter who are playing with me and who have not read
the books are enjoying the game as much as I am and the differnce
in our knowledge about the Gameworld has not had any effect on our
play.
Overall, I like Death Gate the game very much. The graphics are
very good IMO; it is always enjoyable to see a new screen. Best
of all, the puzzles we have solved so far have all been sensible
and fair. No random trying to operate on everthing on the screen
with everything in your inventory to discover which nonsensical
sequence of mouse clicks advances the storyline. I find that
playing the game is like participating in a different yet familiar story
Sometimes discrepancies between the game and the books have to
be gently overlooked but if you don't demand that it "just like
the books" you mayfind it enjoyable to return to the worlds of
Death Gate.
Happy holidays to everyone - I hope you all find the game you
want under the tree :-).
* Dr. Kevin Murnane Cognitive Science *
* Department of Psychology KX...@psuvm.psu.edu *
* Penn State University (814)863-3921 *
* University Park PA 16802 *
Chan Hoong Keong
> Several people have inquired about how the game Death Gate fares
> in relation to the series of books. I am currently midway through
> the 6th book and am also fairly early in the game (early Pryan - the
> second world visited). I began the books as preparation for the
> game. I expected to find the books formulaic and tedious and
> thought I would read one to get an idea of Gameworld and then
> play the game. Much to my surprise I found the books very enjoyable.
> Playing the game while reading the books is interesting. On the
> one hand it is very enjoyable to be playing a game in a world that
> I am currently immersed in in my reading. On the other hand, the
> discrepancies between the game and the books can be jarring at
> times. On the whole, the game does a fairly good job of capturing
> the theme of the books as well as many of the details. Obviously,
> the richness of the worlds created in the books is lacking in the
> game. Also, several of the characters in the game are only pale
> shadows of the characters in the book with the same name. For
[rest deleted]
I have not played the game, but I have read 6 books from the series.
The books are definitely very entertaining (though I expect it will
have an unsatisfactory ending just like other series from the same
authors).
In the books, the worlds and characters are portraited in such a way
that they balance with their counterpart. For example,
1. Air world vs stone (earth/underground) world
2. Fire world vs water world
3. In Arianus, Sartans have all but die out, the menshs thrive. In
Abarrach, the menshs have become extincted and only Sartans remain.
4. In Pyran, Sartans and menshs are dying out. In Chelestra, Sartans
and the menshs co-exist in the same realm.
5. The good dragon are initially found in Pyran, while the evil
serpents are initially found in Chelestra.
6. The monks of Kir in Arianus worship death and consider life is a
prison-house existence and death is where true peace and happiness lie.
The necromancers in Abarrach bring the death back and use them as a
labor force.
7. The prince (Bane) from Arianus seeks chaos and power. The prince
from Abarrach seeks only peace and salvation for his people.
8. In Pyran, dwarfs, humans, elves are enemy. Elves made the best weapon.
Dwarf, humans and elves eventually have to flee together into a
citadel. The dwarf dies. In Chelestra, dwarfs, humans, elves co-exists
in harmony. Elves have forgotten the arts of weapon making. The three
daughters from different races are friends. Elf and human die.
There are numerous comparisons like this thoroughout the books. Does
the game successfully convey this as well?
--
Email : hkc...@hkchan.pc.my
