Return to Krondor (the sequel)

[Greatatlantic]

I bought this title solely on my liking of Betrayal at Krondor a few years back. I gave up trying to play it immediately, and I don't think I put in more than an hour. But since I already paid for it and I hate not getting my money out of something I paid for, I was wondering if anyone here thinks the game is worth another go. I still have to finish up Uru, too, and actually beat the grand campaign for Rome: Total War, too. So, its not like I have nothing to do right now. Oh, and work, there's that too.

 

[Sarvis]

Just out of curiosity, what didn't you like about it? I've never played it... but was thinking about grabbing it at some point since BaT was fun...

 

[Old Scratch]

I remember enjoying it a great deal back when it first came out. Now, it might be a bit too dated for you to get into. Not necessarily in terms of graphics, but gameplay mechanics.

The storyline was fairly unique for a fantasy RPG, and the way the characters develop got a lot more interesting further into the game than at the beginning. At parts of the game you will be switching back and forth between two different parties as they're off doing their own thing. Though it's all done in a linear fashion. The initial two characters they start you out with were kind of the dullest of the bunch IMO too. The brutish cleric with his warhammer you encounter later on is great.

The different kind of environments you end up in were one of the main things that made the game shine IMO. There's a creepy village the party stops in where you have to root out whatever is plaguing it that was probably one of my favorite scenarios in any RPG.

So yeah, it may be worth trying to get into later on if you find yourself iin the mood for some linear storybased adventuring. I remember not being very engaged in the first portion of the game, but it does get more interesting.

 

[Greatatlantic]

I think the camera angles were just counter-intuitive, and at the time I had other things to do, so I just put off playing it. Hmmm... any other opinions?

 

[gromit]

It wasn't a terrible game, in fact I even managed to slug my way through it, but it certainly was only a Krondor game in the Raymond Feist sense, rather than the Sierra RPG one.

 

[Jinxed]

It was terrible. Betrayal at Krondor was massive, mainly thanks to some sort of old 3d (if you can call it that) engine. A lot of the action took place in the comic stripe type sequences with real acting. That was popular then, as silly as it may seem. The artistic part of the game was not forgottenm as items, towns and a few other things were drawn in 2d.

BaK was like a cut down version of morrowind without the morrowind crap.

Return to krondor had 2d backgrounds and a 3d engine for characters. That killed the large gameworld part, exploration and a lot of other things. The controls were a little slugish too. I don't recall the story to be perticularly good either.

 

[bgillisp]

Story for RtK was awful. The game was shorter than BaK too. I beat it in only 4 days, and that was with infrequent playing. Whereas BaK took me two weeks, and that was during vacation when that was about all I was doing.

 

[undead dolphin hacker]

Quite frankly I liked Betrayal at Antara more than Return to Krondor.