Bard's Tale

Skuld · Post by **Skuld** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:02 pm

Has anyone played the Bard's Tale yet? I'll probably end up buying it once I can find a used copy. And I read somewhere that the Bard's voice is that of Cary Elwes, which is definately a plus. Being kind of a parody of the dark alliance type games helps too.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 5:08 pm

The only thing I've read is that, like Fable, it's extremely short. One reviewer said that even if you play through every quest and check out all conceivable endings, it's over in less than 20 hours.

Skuld · Post by **Skuld** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:18 pm

Wow, definately wait for a used copy then. I'll be busy with morrowind for a long time, so new games are gonna have to wait anyway. Thanks.

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:31 am

Well not everyone spends a lot of time on video games. A short game can be the perfect thing for that type of person. You don't want to spend months trying to finish one game. Although it would probably be wise to just rent the game for those of us who spend a lot of time on video games.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:42 am

I was rather interested in Bards Tale, but if it is that short, I'll definately not bother buying it - at least until I find it in a sales bin somewhere.

I don't like short games - even if they are good.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:18 am

Between Fable and Bard's Tale, I'm beginning to wonder whether game companies are making a deliberate attempt to lower RPG players' expectations for length of gameplay. That's two highly touted new RPGs are both deliver a fraction of the time you formerly spent building your character(s), exploring a new world, etc.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:23 am

[QUOTE=fable]Between Fable and Bard's Tale, I'm beginning to wonder whether game companies are making a deliberate attempt to lower RPG players' expectations for length of gameplay. That's two highly touted new RPGs are both deliver a fraction of the time you formerly spent building your character(s), exploring a new world, etc.[/QUOTE]

Well - the lenght of RPG games (especially - but games generally) is something I've argued about on this board for quite some time, where I've stated that it does look like a trend that the lenght is declining.

It seems I've read the trend right for the moment, but I hope I'll be proven wrong with the upcomming releases of some interesting RPGs.

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:40 pm

Hmm... well Rpg's like Fable and Star Wars: Kotor both seemed to be games shorter then I wanted them to be, but both are games you can go back through and play more then once. So it settles out with me and that could be part of the reason they weren't so long. If you're putting in gameplay that branches you off into different directions, good and evil, that can make it harder to create a lengthly game. I'm sure RPGs will be made in the future that will satisfy you guys, length wise. Just wait. They may not offer the ability to create the world around you though.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:50 am

[QUOTE=Bloodthroe]Hmm... well Rpg's like Fable and Star Wars: Kotor both seemed to be games shorter then I wanted them to be, but both are games you can go back through and play more then once. So it settles out with me and that could be part of the reason they weren't so long. <snip>
[/QUOTE]

Well - this is going a little OT, but SW:Kotor weren't all that different wether you went dark or light. In my view it was limited convesation differences and then different force powers you used which is like taking different spells in any other RPG and calling it "variations".

Besides - longer games can offer just as many possiblities for playing over again as a short game, so that point is in my oppinion void. And in fact - I think it is more likely that a longer game offers more possibilities for re-plays.

In my view the problem lies with the fact that the RPG genre has becomed "mainstream" - thus more of a moneymachine. This is visible with the dumbing down of the games (easier puzzles, easier and more combat, easier quests) and an added focus on graphics. Graphics dosen't need to take focus from the gameplay, but it often seems that it does in these multi-platform games.

taltamir · Post by **taltamir** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 1:50 am

Take the heroes of might and magic games... I have never finished one of their official campaigns, while I bought all their games.

It was just too long... I spent the most time on those games ever, but they were still too long. There IS a point in which the game becomes too lengthy... I have a friend who did finish each of their campaigns... it took him SEVERAL YEARS, and I am not kidding here (he didnt play all the time though).

But. Alot of games gain their "playtime" from what I call WASTETIME. Its actions that you have to take, but are completely pointless and waste time... Like random battles in the FF games. Or the completely lack of automated building lists in a turn based RPG (or a poor one with stupid AI and lack of Programmability, so in later stages each turn takes 20 minutes to play out). If you get any emulator for old games you notice a speed time button, the most valuable thing there. It cuts down game time SIGNIFICANTLY, you still go through the plot and all, but you skip alot of wasted time. Then there are things like neverwinter nights, the strong fan community (they just borrowed the DND fanbase) created vast amount of new content, content BETTER then the official campaigns, and most of those are unique. I consider a new neverwinters nights module a new game, because it IS, it just uses a similar graphics engine / combat engine (but almost all games do anyways).

Companies are however, pushing to lower the expected game time, no, to lower expectations PERIOD. Its just easier for them to do. Its like companies dont even bother to make proper playtesting anymore, all pc games are released full of bugs and errors.... and they always get patches. Notice that? oh except that in a few monthes they move over to developing their new game and drop support, leaving the game buggy, but thats ok, everyone expects that. Everyone who doesnt also play a consule. Companies are out there to MAKE MONEY. Those that start with noble goals like making games just dont survive the competition. They appeal to ignorant/stupid/clueless people, because those make the majority. They cut game times, becuase that saves them money. They focus ENTIRELY on graphics and not on story or controls, because thats what sells.
A good game should offer plenty of play time,, but it should also be captivating play time, enjoyable play time. Diablo 2 act 3 was made too vast (although they had a plot reason). Heroes of might and magic campaigns were just tiny plot hooks followed by a regular battle. It was like playing a bunch of scenarious that happen to be under one title of a campaign.

I am not just trying to ***** here, I am just exploring the various aspects of things. It IS possible to offer solid game play, with enough game time, and no wastetime. Its just hard, it is usually comes at the expanse of graphics. Most games dont do it, but some get close. I dont think one can just make a rule of thumb here, I'd say its more of a case by case thing. I like to download a game online... If I am still playing it a few days later then i usually buy it (but sometimes a game is really short but extremely awesome, and i buy it anyways). Also, bargin bins are your friends. I especially like half price books computer game section.. there is one in every one of their stores, and I bought a ton of games there already.

smithrd3512 · Post by **smithrd3512** » Sun Jun 05, 2005 7:34 pm

Well which Bard Tales are you referring to the Original or the new one?

If you ever get the chance try the Original. Granted the Graphics are primitive and gameplay was somewhat repetive but it was an excellent game for its day. Though you be hard press to get to run on some modern game PC's considering it was originally developed for the Apple II.

They did make 2 sequels to the one..Bards Tale II Destiny Knight and Bard;s Tale III Thief of Fate.

Other RPG's that used this old engine were Dragon Wars, Wasteland, and Sentinel Worlds 1.

All are excellent games for their day as long as you can get around the primitive graphics for their day.

Fodder · Post by **Fodder** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 10:47 am

Yeah I enjoyed the original back in the day. I own a copy for the C64 and also still have the NES version. I have an emulated copy that works fine on my current computer.

Darth Zenemij · Post by **Darth Zenemij** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 7:25 pm

Its allright, it can be annoiyng sometimes and have dumb comments and make you doo silly things, but none the less a good game.

the_limey · Post by **the_limey** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 5:28 pm

I think it is fantastic.

A friend described it as Monty Python meets Baldurs Gate, well it's not quite there but it is in the general area.

Well worth a look, despite it's length though you must be prepared for a serious slating of many of the RPG cliches. (Those poor Chosen Ones...

)

Deadalready · Post by **Deadalready** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:27 am

From what I've heard the best thing about the game is the humour and I'm quite willing to check it out based on that fact. For example because the main character can't actually do everything like detect traps instead he summons monsters to do that for him, for traps he summons an old crippled man who complains about the main character's sadistic pleasure in seeing him die before he walks into a trap.

The downside although apparently is it pokes fun at all the modern gameplay conventions but it doesn't offer any alternative or break out of the moulds that other games have set.

Still I'd probably end up buying it considering how cheap it is becoming here.