Review Bard's Tale lubbin' from RPGDot

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: Bard's Tale (2005)

<a href="http://www.rpgdot.com/">RPGDot</a> has posted a rather <A href="http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=1152">smallish review</A> of <A href="http://www.thebardstale.com/">The Bard's Tale</a>. The score is a <b>8/10</b> and the objections seem to be the dated graphics, save game points, and the three quarters view point. Since it's rather short, here's three sentences:
<br>
<blockquote>Let me get something clear right from the start; <u>I hate top down views</u> and I utterly LOATHE and detest save points!</blockquote>
<br>
And a little later..
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Do you have a sense of humour? If not, stop reading this and go play <u>some silly little FPS</u>.</blockquote>
<br>
That's a little strange there considering many of the three quarter view CRPGs these days tend to play more and more like first person shooters.
<br>
<br>
Thanks, <b>Moriendor</b>!
<br>

 

[kris]

I feel the game would rise or fall on wether the humour is good. That said, it failed my stamp of approval quite badly, it came under "did not even bother to download".

 

[triCritical]

You know I really hate crappy reviewers. Not that I would ever defend Fargo's blasphemy, but its a friggin console game coupled with a cheap port. What the hell do they expect? That they are going to revamp the engine, hell while they're at it they can make a good CRPG too!

BTW, is there any news how jacked up Wastland? Speaking of the FP environment, I really dissapointed how party based is going SngChar. Perhaps its just nostalgia...

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I actually prefer to focus on a single character since single character games tend to have more optional methods of doing things. At least, they have the POTENTIAL for more ways of doing things. With a party based game, you generally have every single thing you need within the party so about the only thing you can toss at the player is combat after combat and a few traps to make sure they tossed a thief in the mix for the big challenge.

With a single character, you can have different methods of doing one single character multiple ways because you know that the player will be limited in some fashion.

 

[obediah]

I actually prefer to focus on a single character since single character games tend to have more optional methods of doing things. At least, they have the POTENTIAL for more ways of doing things. With a party based game, you generally have every single thing you need within the party so about the only thing you can toss at the player is combat after combat and a few traps to make sure they tossed a thief in the mix for the big challenge.

With a single character, you can have different methods of doing one single character multiple ways because you know that the player will be limited in some fashion.

I think I ultimately prefer having the party dyanmics, but I can have a lot of fun with a single character game with 2 balance caveats:

1) No crappy AI henchman.

2) Use a system designed for single characters: special == good, D&D == very bad for single character.

And of course they need to wrap a killer game around the character system.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

D&D would be fine for a single character IF they designed the game to allow for optional methods for different character types similar to what Fallout did. That's a rather large IF, though, since D&D games never seem to actually do that. PS:T is the only one that actually made a stab at that. PS:T used the 2nd Edition rules though, and 3E+ actually offers skills more tuned towards a single character D&D CRPG.

 

[triCritical]

I actually prefer to focus on a single character since single character games tend to have more optional methods of doing things. At least, they have the POTENTIAL for more ways of doing things. With a party based game, you generally have every single thing you need within the party so about the only thing you can toss at the player is combat after combat and a few traps to make sure they tossed a thief in the mix for the big challenge.

With a single character, you can have different methods of doing one single character multiple ways because you know that the player will be limited in some fashion.

This is going to sound deja vu, but I agree with you. The reality, IMO at least, is that there are two distinct kinds of RPG's. One is the kind in which a player explores a role manifested through a computer generator character. The other is game, which is nothing more then something analagous to hack and slash DnD. Personally I like them both, as long as they are done professionally and with intelligent design.

Bioware is the classic example of fuck up IMO, devoting all there resources to everything but combat, but essentially having the game be played at least 90% of it, through combat.

Point being, squad based tactical games such as silent storm, Jagged Alliance and DnD are perfectly alright. However, the type of roleplaying one does is much different then typical PnP roleplaying. Its old sk3wl hack and slash, ph4t l00t, character building with combat tactics built in. Honestly I would have liked to see a bard tale created in much the same spirit as the original, focusing of course on combat, but done right and with a party. I think the hard part is in the design, essentially how much tactics vs. fun adventure RPG, to put in a game. JA2 pace in a BG style game can hinder the overall gameplay. I thought ToEE figured it out, if it was only a bit more professional.

Likewise, when playing a game like Fallout, or Arcanum, combat IMO takes the back seat. I no longer care of the fidelity of combat simulation, but rather if it accurately represents my characters ability solve situations in that method. And, as usual combat should be strictly optional!! Given games technologies like Thief 3, there is certainly no reason why games can't be made l33t with a true eye toward roleplaying.

D&D would be fine for a single character IF they designed the game to allow for optional methods for different character types similar to what Fallout did. That's a rather large IF, though, since D&D games never seem to actually do that. PS:T is the only one that actually made a stab at that. PS:T used the 2nd Edition rules though, and 3E+ actually offers skills more tuned towards a single character D&D CRPG.

This is true. However, I think DnD is designed to be played with a party in mind. I know this is not gospel, considering I played single character, single player modules, but I think the spirit of DnD rules and gameplay focuses on the party. Not to mention, while there are more skills, feats, etc. for non combat situation, combat related character ability still dominate by far.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

D&D is ment to be played as a party, sure.. But each person is only supposed to play one character. Ever played games where the DM allowed people to play multiple characters? They devolve in to hack and slash games fairly quickly because that's really the main point to allowing players to play multiple characters.

The same thing goes for D&D CRPGs. If one player controls a fleet of characters, the only challenge they'll have is combat for the most part. A locked door isn't going to present much of a problem to a party because the party will have a thief who can pick locks, or a wizard with knock, or a barbarian with that 19 STR that can kick it in. The party CRPG offers the player way, way too many options for options to actually be critical parts of the design.

If the player was just playing a Sorceror or Cleric, he might have to find another route around the door or a key. The game would have to be designed with considerations for that in mind.. Well, unless you're BioWare and can just force the player to take a pitifully done AI henchman for situations like that.

 

[Section8]

Bioware is the classic example of fuck up IMO, devoting all there resources to everything but combat, but essentially having the game be played at least 90% of it, through combat.

And the most tragic thing? The combat in Bioware games is usually little more than a timesink. Click on an enemy and watch your character do something every 6 seconds until combat is resolved.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Where does RPGDot find these dickheads? Slowly, ever so slowly, RPGDot is turning into an FPS gaming zone.

 

[Dhruin]

Based on what?

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Role-playing should be done through one character.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Based on what?

To which do you refer? The dickheads or the FPS comment?

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Corwin's a bitch, anyway. He enjoys first-person because it allows him to see Cleve Blakemore's cock in much better detail.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that RPGCodex is complaining about a reviewer who is upset that the viewpoint of a game was changed from its predecessors?

 

[Roqua]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that RPGCodex is complaining about a reviewer who is upset that the viewpoint of a game was changed from its predecessors?

No. What do you expect from retarded_cow_lady? She is retarded.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

You know fucking what? I don't really care that the viewpoint was changed because, in all honesty, the original Bard's Tale games sucked. I hated them, the viewpoint pissed me off to no end. Navigation was hell and the combat was piss-poor.

At least the new Bard's Tale was funny at times and some of the songs werent' half bad. Viewpoints don't fucking bother me, unless they're totally fucked up a la the dungeons in the early Ultima games.

 

[Dhruin]

Based on what?

To which do you refer? The dickheads or the FPS comment?

The FPS comment. I get that we're all dickheads bla bla bla, but I don't get the FPS gaming zone.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

You know fucking what? I don't really care that the viewpoint was changed because, in all honesty, the original Bard's Tale games sucked. I hated them, the viewpoint pissed me off to no end. Navigation was hell and the combat was piss-poor.

At least the new Bard's Tale was funny at times and some of the songs werent' half bad. Viewpoints don't fucking bother me, unless they're totally fucked up a la the dungeons in the early Ultima games.

This is what I mean. The thing that most of us dread more than anything is Falllout 3 being a first-person shooter. Because we're fans of Fallout. People who weren't really into it wouldn't mind it, and considering how much bigger of a market they make up, could lead a developer to believe that it would be best to change Fallout in ways we would hate. I don't know much about Corwin, but he appears to be a fan of the Wizardry games, and one might assume the Bard's Tale, Might & Magic and Betrayal at Krondor games as well. I haven't played any Bard's Tale games, including this one, but I can understand why a fan of them would be upset over the change in the series.

 

[Roqua]

I agree. I'm not a fan of Might and magic. And I was never a huge fan of Bard's Tale. But changing around popular IPs without regard from fans, or supporting devs that do that just doesn't seem right to me.

To use an argument I used before: Would it be right if Terminator 4 was changed into a slapstick comedy starring Eddy Murphy and Drew Carry? No, it justs ruins an IP and screws the fans. A new IP could have been used. Just as a new IP could have been used for the new fps might and magic and Bard's Tale.

If the next Diablo was made into a TB party rpg with lots of open game play and quests it would be the type of game I like, but I still wouldn't support it since the devs showed no regard for the fans of Diablo by changing the IP into something it isn't, catering to people who didn't make the previous games popular.

And how is rpgcodex less of an FPS site? I would say its more of an FPS site if anything.

 

[Sol Invictus]

How is the RPG Codex an FPS site?

 

[Naked_Lunch]

This is what I mean. The thing that most of us dread more than anything is Falllout 3 being a first-person shooter. Because we're fans of Fallout. People who weren't really into it wouldn't mind it, and considering how much bigger of a market they make up, could lead a developer to believe that it would be best to change Fallout in ways we would hate. I don't know much about Corwin, but he appears to be a fan of the Wizardry games, and one might assume the Bard's Tale, Might & Magic and Betrayal at Krondor games as well. I haven't played any Bard's Tale games, including this one, but I can understand why a fan of them would be upset over the change in the series.

Yes, but the fact is, he's seems more upset over the change in perspective rather than, from a fan's point of view, the franchise was totally ass-raped and turned into a DA clone.

It wouldn't bother me that much if Fallout was first person, as long as it was still a good game. Of course, I'd rather it be isometric, but I think we can agree that's not gonna happen.

Rex, don't mind Roqua, he's too elite for us.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that RPGCodex is complaining about a reviewer who is upset that the viewpoint of a game was changed from its predecessors?

Do you think the remake would have been less action CRPG-ish if they'd kept the first person viewpoint? Most likely, it would have been even more actiony complete with actiony jump puzzles and other great fun things like that.

I would say its more of an FPS site if anything.

That would be a neat trick to pull off considering this is my site and I've said numerous times I don't like the first person perspective in CRPGs or the WASD control scheme in third person over the shoulder CRPGs.

PS. Try to find a news item on this site about that new Might & Magic game Arkane is making.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

I think the game could have been more like Bard's Tale if it was first-person. I don't think they would have made it like Elder Scrolls/Underworld/System Shock/Deus Ex. Bryan Fargo doesn't seem like a "Pushing the envelope of immersion!" kind of guy, but then again I'm no expert. Their aim seemed to have been to make a silly game about the Bard character and RPG cliches, which they could have done in a traditional Bard's Tale format. If I ran an RPG site and I was supposed to assign someone to review Bard's Tale, I'd pick a fan of the series since those are the people who would be most interested in it and the reviewer could impart more meaningful information to them than someone who was new to the series.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Based on what?

To which do you refer? The dickheads or the FPS comment?

The FPS comment. I get that we're all dickheads bla bla bla, but I don't get the FPS gaming zone.

That was an overly general comment meant to take advantage of two commonly held beliefs:

1. That FPS gamers are idiots.
2. That more games are becoming FPS-like (actiony combat, linear, storyline that's set in stone, combat focus of the game).

Therefore, I'm implying that as more FPS-like games get (eg: Oblivion's supposed actiony combat, DS2's 'all combat, no story'), RPGDot is moving more and more towards becoming a fully-fledged FPS gaming site by (not just covering these games but) heaping praise upon them and giving them "92%!" scores.

As a somewhat relevant) side note, review scores make much more sense when you realise it's not a score out of 1 - 100 or 1 - 10 but rather a score that STARTS at 50 - 100 or 5 - 10. Often, games given "60%" are awful and very rarely does a game ever get below half marks. Think about games that do get below half marks too. A game that gets 40% is crap. A game that gets 20% is also crap. On the other hand, a game that gets 80% is good and a game that gets 90% is somehow so much better.

If you think of them as scores that start at the halfway mark, a score of 7 suddenly doesn't look so good.