Is this REALLY a Bard's Tale sequel ???

For all Bard's Tale IV discussion that does not fit elsewhere, suggestions, feedback, etc. No spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

Hieronymous Alloy
Acolyte
Posts: 51
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 9:50 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Hieronymous Alloy » September 26th, 2018, 9:37 am

Just because something was in the original game(s) doesn't mean it was a good decision. :shrug: There's a reason that even the 2nd Edition D&D DM's Handbook cautions against random encounters and random treasure and recommends that DMs write individualized encounters and individualized placed treasure: it leads to a better game, both narratively and balance wise. "Player control" in this context translates to "incentivizes player grinding" and I don't have time for that kind of thing in my life any more (it's why I quit playing MMO's).

That said, how much of this game have you played? Because there's an *immense* amount of side quest content for you to grind away at if you want. The option to out-level the content is still there, you just have to do it via grinding placed sidequests rather than spamming MIBL at groups of 99 berserkers over and over again.
Crosmando wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 9:27 am
Also theres an argument to be had that classic BT's step-based movement and RE chance on every step itself gave the games a kinda roguelike feel which was a part of the identity of Bard's Tale gameplay.
This on the other hand, ok, that's a decent point. It's still not something I really consider make-or-break but it's probably the best argument available for random encounters. I think *to an extent* the save point system replicates some of that feeling of ongoing tension on a first playthrough, but there is something lost on successive playthroughs.

edit: let me put it this way -- if they added a "hard mode" DLC or Free-LC that added random encounters etc., I'd probably enable it on replays, sure. I don't think it's mission critical to the dungeon crawling experience but I'll agree it could add something on replays.
Last edited by Hieronymous Alloy on September 26th, 2018, 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1876
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by thebruce » September 26th, 2018, 10:01 am

Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 8:39 am
Yeah, I think most of those mechanics would be dead in the water in todays' market anyway. Most gaming is moving away from randomness as players want more tactical depth, having to eternally trudge back to the magic store is annoying and lacks strategic depth (it just creates an artificial time sink of trudging back to town), endless spamming of mass blob slaughter isn't even really a game at all by modern standards, they do have the review board but they were trying to avoid the same constantly-trudge-back-to-town issue, etc. Random encounters and grinding aren't things most players really want any more -- nobody has that kind of time!
The trick developers face is figuring out what is a technological improvement, and what is a gameplay preference that has changed by following trends over the years, which can be brought back fresh and not considered fundamentally "out dated" (if implemented and wrapped up successfully). That's what's meant by "reviving" - bringing back a prefence/style/genre that has been lost due simply to changing mass market preferences, often influenced merely by what's popular, fresh and new. Preferences are never "out dated" (just perhaps not current). Technology though, yes. And in this forum you'll find that the majority of popular suggestions and criticisms are not about technological old-school elements, but gameplay preferences from the originals, and how to bring them to this "revival" sequel game in a way that still "feels" like Bard's Tale, but also with improved technological capabilities.
As usual, no one wants that "80's game" strawman.

Hieronymous Alloy wrote:I really don't get the hate.
You keep saying this, but what you don't understand is that that's all about preference. You like something others don't. You don't have to get that. And that sentiment is exactly the same going the other direction. That's normal, and that's fine.
It's not fine when someone "doesn't get the hate" in a manner that implies invalidating or minimizing others' opinions.

Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 9:37 am
Just because something was in the original game(s) doesn't mean it was a good decision. :shrug: There's a reason that even the 2nd Edition D&D DM's Handbook cautions against random encounters and random treasure and recommends that DMs write individualized encounters and individualized placed treasure: it leads to a better game, both narratively and balance wise. "Player control" in this context translates to "incentivizes player grinding" and I don't have time for that kind of thing in my life any more (it's why I quit playing MMO's).
First, tabletop DM games obviously play differently than a CRPG. But yep, very much sounds like a BT4 the likes of BT1-3 isn't your cup of tea. That's fine. There can be other game styles in the "Bard's Tale" umbrella. But what you're looking for arguably (which is all this discussion) isn't very BT1-3-like. (points to numerous other threads about what "makes" Bard's Tale - in an effort to not rehash that debate in this thread about BT4 reviews).
And it looks like inXile might be following suit, if the observation of the missing "IV" in the game titles is in accurate indication... intriguing in and of itself...

---ON TOPIC

I know it's hard to post links that don't agree with our own opinion, lol, but it's interesting to see people who enjoy the game finding the positive reviews, and people who are critical of the game sharing more negative reviews. It's like the right vs the left in the political MSM, haha
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

Hieronymous Alloy
Acolyte
Posts: 51
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 9:50 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Hieronymous Alloy » September 26th, 2018, 10:14 am

thebruce wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 10:01 am
You like something others don't. You don't have to get that. And that sentiment is exactly the same going the other direction. That's normal, and that's fine. It's not fine when someone "doesn't get the hate" in a manner that implies invalidating or minimizing others' opinions.

. . . . But yep, very much sounds like a BT4 the likes of BT1-3 isn't your cup of tea. That's fine. There can be other game styles in the "Bard's Tale" umbrella.
Those are fair points -- but I think the counterpoint is that if it's just a matter of taste and preferences, that doesn't mean it's a bad game, just a different game from what was expected. And if it's just a matter of taste (to bring this back on topic) a lot of these negative reviews seem unduly harsh.

I don't think my comments minimized anyone else's opinion -- that's why I said *I* didn't understand the hate -- I was talking about myself, not others. On the other hand, the frequent repetition by others that I "just don't understand" things I *do* understand (e.g., the game design differences between random and placed encounters), or that I haven't played games I had already stated I did in fact play, etc. . .


EDIT: I really like the remasters too, as remasters. They're perfect for me -- all the nostalgia, without the busy work and with minimal grinding.
Last edited by Hieronymous Alloy on September 26th, 2018, 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1876
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by thebruce » September 26th, 2018, 10:40 am

Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 10:14 am
I think the counterpoint is that if it's just a matter of taste and preferences, that doesn't mean it's a bad game, just a different game from what was expected. And if it's just a matter of taste (to bring this back on topic) a lot of these negative reviews seem unduly harsh.
I wouldn't disagree; in those cases though most of them are based on expectations that weren't met, so anger, frustration, sadness can certainly influence the heat of the criticism of the game. Their "liking" of the game was based on what they expected to find a sequel. There's a wide cross section of people who A: Don't like the game and don't like the sequel, B: Like the game but don't like it as a sequel, C: Love the game in every way. I don't think there's anyone who loves it as a sequel but thinks it's a bad game. But it does seem like there's a whole lot of criticism from the people who love the game, of the people who don't like the game as being in some way unreasonable or desiring "an 80's game". That's when it really gets unduly heated.
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

PsychicMonk
Scholar
Posts: 160
Joined: April 16th, 2012, 10:54 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by PsychicMonk » September 26th, 2018, 11:16 am

thebruce wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 10:40 am
Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 10:14 am
I think the counterpoint is that if it's just a matter of taste and preferences, that doesn't mean it's a bad game, just a different game from what was expected. And if it's just a matter of taste (to bring this back on topic) a lot of these negative reviews seem unduly harsh.
I wouldn't disagree; in those cases though most of them are based on expectations that weren't met, so anger, frustration, sadness can certainly influence the heat of the criticism of the game. Their "liking" of the game was based on what they expected to find a sequel. There's a wide cross section of people who A: Don't like the game and don't like the sequel, B: Like the game but don't like it as a sequel, C: Love the game in every way. I don't think there's anyone who loves it as a sequel but thinks it's a bad game. But it does seem like there's a whole lot of criticism from the people who love the game, of the people who don't like the game as being in some way unreasonable or desiring "an 80's game". That's when it really gets unduly heated.
Interesting Article: https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/bards-tal ... ertainment

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1876
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by thebruce » September 26th, 2018, 11:52 am

The difficulty wasn't simply because it's a modern sequel to classic trilogy. The difficulty was because of what inXile wanted it to be. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with nostalgic gaming, the tension only comes when you ALSO want to make a game that appeals to a "modern" major marketplace. THAT is the tension.

"The game needed enough nostalgic flavor and familiar gameplay elements to appeal to those fans who fondly recall the original while also incorporating modern game design innovations."

And apparently forgetting that you can indeed have gameplay mechanics that make use of modern technological advancements. It doesn't have to be one or the other. The trick is figuring out how. The article seems to paint "nostalgic gaming" as the problem itself.

""We're kind of thinking of this as The Bard's Tale Fourteen," he says. This approach provided creative agency to the design team, allowing them to excise outdated gameplay mechanics."

See my previous post. This quote entirely misses the point. No one wants "an 80's game" with outdated technology. Rather gameplay styles are never outdated - just not necessarily current. If someone wants to "revive" a genre or a gaming style, you don't do that by simply labeling anything you don't want to implement as out-dated. You have to figure out what actually IS limited by technology, and what is just a matter of genre/gaming preference - who are your demographic? And many who dislike BD would say they are appealing to a very different market.

What it didn't do, however, is solve for fan expectations.

Again, that entirely depends on the intent of the developers. Do you want to create an honest and faithful sequel? Or create a game that appeals first to current trends and gameplay preferences? The latter necessarily means "excising" what that demographic wouldn't like - and that's not reviving the old, that's appealing to the current.

Deeply invested audiences eagerly await the evolution of beloved IPs, but the line between appreciation and ownership can become blurred, especially when fans have staked their own money in a project.

Indeed... based on expectations and what they've been led to believe they were staking their money on.

"Feedback should be fine from a creator's standpoint, we like receiving feedback. It's when it's [an] avalanche — each individual person, it's nothing — but when you've got this wave of feedback it can seem overwhelming."

That either means A: You've hit a nerve and you're justified in moving forward, or B: You've hit a nerve and are rightly getting blowback. The mere fact that negative feedback is overwhelming doesn't immediately invalidate negative feedback. How you respond to negative feedback makes a world of difference (especially if a whole lot of it is from people who staked their money on it).

"There [is] unavoidable [conflict]: these two visions can't exist in the same game world. It can't be grim and light-hearted. It can't be colorful and dank. There's an extent where we have to say, 'I'm sorry, our vision doesn't line up with yours.'"

BT was never light-hearted. This conflict is because of Bard's Tale 2004 - an inXile creation, and Bard's Tale 1-3 - an Interplay creation. And there's an enormous gap of time and people and trends in between BT1-3 and BT4, a period which was never tested for successful ideas and 'innovations'.

But returning to a world we haven't visited in a long time is bound to feel different because we have evolved.

The response to BT:Remastered compared to BT4 seems to disagree with the intent of this sentiment.

"I think there's something inherently destructive about sequels in general," Rogers points out. "Because if you liked the Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers the next book can't actually be Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Something has to change. A character has to die, new characters have to be introduced. You have to be in a new land. There has to be a new problem. You can't advance a series without changing it."

Not really. Lord of the Rings IS primarily considered a trilogy. The movies were produced as parallel to the existing trilogy. The Bard's Tales were independent games. It's considered a trilogy because no game came after 3 for 30 years. The Two Towers was written to be a sequel, along with Return of the King. If you liked The Two Towers, the next book obviously has to be Return of the King. The story isn't complete. The sequel isn't destructive, the sequel is completionist. The parts are incomplete segments of the whole story.
So, sequels - true sequels - don't have to be inherently destructive. They are necessary.
A sequel that forcefully continues a completed story, or adds to a storyworld content that clashes or contradicts previous stories - THAT is inherently destructive. That's not a problem with sequels, that's a problem with the one making the sequel.

One of the ways Rogers and inXile approached the problem was to release a remastered version of the first game. This gave fans who wanted an updated version of their remembered joy exactly that

Which wasn't a sequel...

Rogers then chose to set The Bard's Tale IV 150 years after the events of the original trilogy

Which doesn't mean it can't still be a good sequel...

allowing for the creation of a fresh story that could work for old and new fans while also providing callbacks and references for more seasoned adventurers.

Again, this doesn't mean it can't be a good, successful sequel...

"I've given up a lot of ownership over the game… It's a conversation. There's the dungeon master and the player." As an example, the character portrait design and direction improved after fans expressed disappointment in the first iterations. In this instance, the passion of the intended audience helped advance the design.

And that's great. Those were improvements on technical quality, not preferencial gameplay style/genre though.

The point at which nostalgia-driven fan expectations eclipse artistic possibilities can be frustrating both to creators and to less outspoken members of the fandom.

I don't think "artistic vision" was ever really an issue. No one denied that the vision was gorgeous. No one argued that the artwork and vision itself was sub-par. 3D modeling of the artwork perhaps, but as just admitted that was improved after feedback.

"You can't let fans co-opt the entire creative process no matter what their agenda is."

Ouch, man.
Ouch.
Really.
Someone missed the whole "conversation" over the last few years :(

The article really does a disservice to the fans of the trilogy - especially financial backers - who didn't like the direct BT4 took. And that's an understatement.

...and this coming from the upper-end of the 'grognard' scale who thinks BT4 actually is a good game (having only played a few hours) despite feeling that it very much missed the mark on the "Bard's Tale sequel" end of things.
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Themadcow
Explorer
Posts: 332
Joined: June 9th, 2015, 1:46 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Themadcow » September 26th, 2018, 12:15 pm

Hey @theBruce - that's an excellent rebuttal to the article. Nice work fella.

Also, Crossmando - very much that with Etrian Odyssey. It's not like no-one likes these games any more, it's just about knowing your audience and accepting that success is relative.
~~~ CPC's - Getting in the way of fun gameplay since 1998 ~~~

Jalis
Acolyte
Posts: 77
Joined: March 21st, 2018, 3:25 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Jalis » September 26th, 2018, 1:43 pm

I think there definitely *is* an audience for the kind of game I think a lot of backers were expecting. You look at games like Etrian Odyssey with its layered dungeons, battle system, to the Disgaea series with its tactical combat systems and more importantly, class advancement systems, and a few others... mix them together and you kind of have Bard's Tale mechanics... so there is an audience. And those are recent and ongoing series, so technologically speaking, there's ways to do those types of games without bleeding edge AAA graphics, and still appeal to large audiences.

The Remasters kind of illuminates that really, no -- BT1 does not have a lot of driving story, its melee characters are mostly there to keep your spellcasters in back and protected, etc, so at least the original needed to be expanded upon to some degree in order to be successful. It's just that the devs went off in such a wild different direction (namely, Hearthstone/Stonekeep?) that they simply seem to have over-corrected.

I'm fully enjoying this game, and have the same concerns as most. But... it probably should have been something different, and I think reviews/sales will probably reflect that, unfortunately, in the end. Which isn't good for any of us. :/

eisberg
Scholar
Posts: 188
Joined: August 14th, 2018, 2:51 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by eisberg » September 26th, 2018, 1:49 pm

Drool wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 9:08 am
Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 8:39 am
a good job incorporating the lore and events of the prior games (Mangar's Tower, Spectre Snare, etc.)
Well... it does a good job of name checking the originals. I wouldn't say it's properly incorporating the lore, though. The opening cinematic is a gigantic retcon of the originals.
Watched that opening cinematic many times over, still see no retcon at all. I know someone mentioned Tarjan because it said 3 men, tarjan is male, so that makes sense, but he is still referred to as a God in the game. So where is the retcon?

User avatar
Spectralshade
Scholar
Posts: 219
Joined: May 22nd, 2012, 8:58 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Spectralshade » September 26th, 2018, 3:12 pm

Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 7:58 am
I don't get the hate. It's not an exact replica but it couldn't be -- even the remasters aren't exact replicas, they add modern convenience features like automapping and quicksaving.
it's not even the same style of game.

barrows deep is a puzzle game with light rpg elements.

bards tale series was about exploring a world with a never ending trickle of monsters, never making you feel safe while back towards safe haven. Where managing your resources had to keep in mind that you could be jumped by monsters at any given time. Where death didn't mean you needed to reload and pretend it never happened, but where you just rolled with it and resurected your characters at a temple and got on with it, an experience learned.

bards tale was alot of things more than I mentioned, but it was never a puzzle game with light rpg elements thrown into it just to pretend it was an rpg like barrows deep does.

Not one mechanic or variable interpretation did they keep from the bards tale series in barrows deep.

barrows deep is as much bards tale 4 as howard the duck is an avengers movie.

User avatar
Spectralshade
Scholar
Posts: 219
Joined: May 22nd, 2012, 8:58 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Spectralshade » September 26th, 2018, 3:16 pm

Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 8:39 am

Yeah, I think most of those mechanics would be dead in the water in todays' market anyway.
you realize a whole genre of diablo clones got succesfull with those exact mechanics, just placed in a specific viewpoint and in realtime, right?

not to mention that rogue and rogue-lite games are still popular. So I have no idea why you came up with that remark.

User avatar
Spectralshade
Scholar
Posts: 219
Joined: May 22nd, 2012, 8:58 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Spectralshade » September 26th, 2018, 3:24 pm

eisberg wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 1:49 pm
Drool wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 9:08 am
Hieronymous Alloy wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 8:39 am
a good job incorporating the lore and events of the prior games (Mangar's Tower, Spectre Snare, etc.)
Well... it does a good job of name checking the originals. I wouldn't say it's properly incorporating the lore, though. The opening cinematic is a gigantic retcon of the originals.
Watched that opening cinematic many times over, still see no retcon at all. I know someone mentioned Tarjan because it said 3 men, tarjan is male, so that makes sense, but he is still referred to as a God in the game. So where is the retcon?
how could tarjan wage war on other gods when the gods died in the opening cinematic of barrows deep?

User avatar
ZiN
Adventurer
Posts: 681
Joined: January 27th, 2015, 7:57 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by ZiN » September 26th, 2018, 3:42 pm

PsychicMonk wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 11:16 am
Interesting Article: https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/bards-tal ... ertainment
Now that's what the "toxic fandom" calls "garbage-tier":
Case in point: numerous Star Wars fans hate the latest Skywalker trilogy for specious reasons, and loudly proclaim the superiority of the original films.
Is there a specious reason, why people expressing their opinions is a problem? By the way, he dares to call that garbage "Skywalker trilogy", when the films thoroughly humiliated and made laughable the Skywalkers and their relatives, in every possible way. Barrows Deep and Star Wars indeed have things in common: They both dishonored their legacy and they are both going to get abysmal user ratings and lose money.
While the Bard's Tale community has been largely positive, Rogers has still had to contend with the fact that each fan has a different vision for The Bard's Tale IV.
The community was "largely positive" until updates started coming. With every update it got worse and worse, until by "alpha" it was 50/50 at best. And we have agreed on a few things on the alpha thread, for example.
In the lead up to the game's release, message boards on the Steam page were full of people ready to criticize the game for any deviation from the original or more importantly, from their memory of the original. Rogers says that he sees conflict between these memories and his creation.
"Memories". Memories of 2 weeks ago, when they played Bard's Tale 1 Remastered and gave it 95% positive rating. By the way, most of the initial "review bombing" was due to the game not launching, crashing all the time, horrible performance, weird save-system, abysmal localizations and so on. Thanks for trying to insinuate that fans of the original series are responsible.
"I think there's something inherently destructive about sequels in general," Rogers points out.
Then do us a favour and stay far far away from making another sequel, or "spiritual successor". Thanks!
Rogers then chose to set The Bard's Tale IV 150 years after the events of the original trilogy, allowing for the creation of a fresh story that could work for old and new fans while also providing callbacks and references for more seasoned adventurers.
Yeah, most of his callbacks and references are incorrect and inappropriate and make it painfully obvious that he was never a fan of Bard's Tale and has no idea of dungeon-crawlers.
As an example, the character portrait design and direction improved after fans expressed disappointment in the first iterations.
Remember guys, the portraits that we currently have are the "improved" versions. My favourites are the male elf bard, and the smiling dwarf with the epic beard!
You can't let fans co-opt the entire creative process no matter what their agenda is.
Don't worry, I won't ever again.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9785
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by Drool » September 26th, 2018, 4:35 pm

eisberg wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 1:49 pm
Watched that opening cinematic many times over, still see no retcon at all. I know someone mentioned Tarjan because it said 3 men, tarjan is male, so that makes sense, but he is still referred to as a God in the game. So where is the retcon?
Tarjan wasn't trying to release some ancient evil that nobody's heard of until now. He was trying to unmake reality.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

eisberg
Scholar
Posts: 188
Joined: August 14th, 2018, 2:51 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by eisberg » September 26th, 2018, 5:11 pm

Drool wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 4:35 pm
eisberg wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 1:49 pm
Watched that opening cinematic many times over, still see no retcon at all. I know someone mentioned Tarjan because it said 3 men, tarjan is male, so that makes sense, but he is still referred to as a God in the game. So where is the retcon?
Tarjan wasn't trying to release some ancient evil that nobody's heard of until now. He was trying to unmake reality.
None of the enemies among in the BT1-3 were ever given a motive for what they were doing. Now we know what that motive is. That isn't retconning it at all, that is expanding the lore. Also, the storyline for Tarjan is we are told that destruction is coming unless we do something about it. I don't remember anything about "unmaking reality".
Last edited by eisberg on September 26th, 2018, 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

eisberg
Scholar
Posts: 188
Joined: August 14th, 2018, 2:51 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by eisberg » September 26th, 2018, 5:16 pm

Spectralshade wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 3:24 pm
eisberg wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 1:49 pm
Drool wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 9:08 am

Well... it does a good job of name checking the originals. I wouldn't say it's properly incorporating the lore, though. The opening cinematic is a gigantic retcon of the originals.
Watched that opening cinematic many times over, still see no retcon at all. I know someone mentioned Tarjan because it said 3 men, tarjan is male, so that makes sense, but he is still referred to as a God in the game. So where is the retcon?
how could tarjan wage war on other gods when the gods died in the opening cinematic of barrows deep?
Those are not the same Gods. Clearly the Gods that Tarjan killed came after the Gods that were in the opening cinematic.
Given that Gods can be killed by other Gods and even by mortals, and mortals can become Gods, it clearly shows you the nature of Gods in this world.
So it stands to reason that the 2 Grey gods came before the Gods in BT1-3, the Grey gods were banished, and later on new God rose up and it is those Gods you see in BT1-3.

_noblesse_oblige_
Master
Posts: 1191
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 7:18 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by _noblesse_oblige_ » September 26th, 2018, 5:46 pm

thebruce wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 10:40 am
But it does seem like there's a whole lot of criticism from the people who love the game, of the people who don't like the game as being in some way unreasonable or desiring "an 80's game".
Yes, very much so, and this is something I've been trying to highlight lately. Those of us who have a negative view of Barrows Deep generally have not been personally attacking people who have a positive view of it. We might disagree with some of their statements, like them calling it "a faithful sequel" or "having 100% of the elements of the originals", but those disagreements are not attacks on them. By contrast, we've been called haters and even "a little crazy", we've been told that "we have to get over it", and we have had grossly inaccurate and simplistic straw men repeatedly stood up to represent our alleged position and even been blamed for parts of the Barrows Deep game that they didn't like (save points, for instance). Why? What gives here? Is it not possible for the camp that mostly got what they wanted to be civil and respect that others have differing opinions? Our attacks on Barrows Deep are not attacks on them for liking Barrows Deep. Do they not see the difference? This is why I keep wondering about motives. (And, for my trouble was told that I was making "sly insinuations", when nothing was being insinuated.)

And, all of this is happening in spite of the fact that game approval stands at 52% on Steam, almost a week after first patch and about two weeks after initial release. If the initial negative ratings was a massive conspiracy by "haters" of the game, as someone suggested, then this must be a conspiracy of epic proportions. Apparently, the small minority of "haters" is not so small.
cmibl<enter>

eisberg
Scholar
Posts: 188
Joined: August 14th, 2018, 2:51 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by eisberg » September 26th, 2018, 5:55 pm

_noblesse_oblige_ wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 5:46 pm
thebruce wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 10:40 am
But it does seem like there's a whole lot of criticism from the people who love the game, of the people who don't like the game as being in some way unreasonable or desiring "an 80's game".
Yes, very much so, and this is something I've been trying to highlight lately. Those of us who have a negative view of Barrows Deep generally have not been personally attacking people who have a positive view of it. We might disagree with some of their statements, like them calling it "a faithful sequel" or "having 100% of the elements of the originals", but those disagreements are not attacks on them. By contrast, we've been called haters and even "a little crazy", we've been told that "we have to get over it", and we have had grossly inaccurate and simplistic straw men repeatedly stood up to represent our alleged position and even been blamed for parts of the Barrows Deep game that they didn't like (save points, for instance). Why? What gives here? Is it not possible for the camp that mostly got what they wanted to be civil and respect that others have differing opinions? Our attacks on Barrows Deep are not attacks on them for liking Barrows Deep. Do they not see the difference? This is why I keep wondering about motives. (And, for my trouble was told that I was making "sly insinuations", when nothing was being insinuated.)

And, all of this is happening in spite of the fact that game approval stands at 52% on Steam, almost a week after first patch and about two weeks after initial release. If the initial negative ratings was a massive conspiracy by "haters" of the game, as someone suggested, then this must be a conspiracy of epic proportions. Apparently, the small minority of "haters" is not so small.
Plenty of attacks against those who like the game have come from those who don't like the game, so attacks are happening from both sides.

Also, looking over the Steam reviews, there are not that many reviews in relation to those who expected something closer to the 1980s games and the ones that do exists vast majority of them are from people who didn't buy it from Steam which means their review is not even being used for the percentage on Steam since the percentage only represents people who bought the game from Steam (rather than getting a key from somewhere else and activating it on Steam).

I suspect that once the technical issues are fixed, that we'll see it go up to the 70s.

_noblesse_oblige_
Master
Posts: 1191
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 7:18 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by _noblesse_oblige_ » September 26th, 2018, 5:59 pm

Themadcow wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 12:15 pm
Hey @theBruce - that's an excellent rebuttal to the article. Nice work fella.
Seconded. Was about to write a rebuttal, then saw the rebuttal, and didn't really have much to add.

Really have to drive home the point that the game was pitched a certain way and they took money based on the way it was pitched. To make something so utterly different than the set expectation, hiding in the sheep's skin of "we need our creative license", is what has so many backers rankled. Trying to say we're all high on nostalgia is a miss. Also, the fact that they thought releasing the BT1 remaster before Barrows Deep would somehow remind us of what things had been like, and why they needed to change, completely backfired. Yes. it reminded alright and made the craving for a new Bard's Tale game that much stronger. (Nostalgia amplification rather than nostalgia killing.) And, it also showed how the series could be "modernized" without compromising its heart, soul, mechanics, and charm. I saw more than one comment of people saying that the BT1 remaster is what BT4 could have been and they meant it in a completely positive and sincere manner.
cmibl<enter>

eisberg
Scholar
Posts: 188
Joined: August 14th, 2018, 2:51 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV Reviews

Post by eisberg » September 26th, 2018, 6:08 pm

_noblesse_oblige_ wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 5:59 pm
Themadcow wrote:
September 26th, 2018, 12:15 pm
Hey @theBruce - that's an excellent rebuttal to the article. Nice work fella.
Seconded. Was about to write a rebuttal, then saw the rebuttal, and didn't really have much to add.

Really have to drive home the point that the game was pitched a certain way and they took money based on the way it was pitched. To make something so utterly different than the set expectation, hiding in the sheep's skin of "we need our creative license", is what has so many backers rankled. Trying to say we're all high on nostalgia is a miss. Also, the fact that they thought releasing the BT1 remaster before Barrows Deep would somehow remind us of what things had been like, and why they needed to change, completely backfired. Yes. it reminded alright and made the craving for a new Bard's Tale game that much stronger. (Nostalgia amplification rather than nostalgia killing.) And, it also showed how the series could be "modernized" without compromising its heart, soul, mechanics, and charm. I saw more than one comment of people saying that the BT1 remaster is what BT4 could have been and they meant it in a completely positive and sincere manner.
I disagree with this. I don't know how people didn't understand that that BT4 was not going to be like the originals when the campaign page and the 2 Q&A videos with Fargo released during the campaign showed that it wasn't going to be the same as the originals. For myself, had they showed it was going to be like the originals I would not have ever backed it. I nostalgically love the originals, they were great fun in the 1980s, but it is not, nor close to, what I would want in games now days.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest