How do you rank the games?

For all discussion on all the previous Bard's Tale games: the classic 1980s games (Bard's Tale, II: Destiny Knight, & III: Thief of Fate) & the humorous Bard's Tale (2004) spin off.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

ssfsx17
Initiate
Posts: 22
Joined: January 26th, 2015, 1:35 pm

How do you rank the games?

Postby ssfsx17 » February 14th, 2017, 12:32 pm

I would rank them as follows:

Best: BT1

2nd: BT2

3rd: BT3

My reasoning: BT2 is where the critical hit and mass-magic creep starts to set in. Normal weapon damage and single-target spells become decreasingly useful. You can expect all but one party member to get critically-murdered in the final battle. Worst of all are the real-time puzzles, which feel like they break a game design contract that had been established by the subgenre.

BT3 is pretty much all about critical hits and the DIVA & NUKE spells. Normal attacks are totally obsolete. And there are way too damn many darkness tiles. The random encounters can feel like boss battles, with how many enemy groups there are and how much summoning they do. It's telling when people say that you ought to just run away from as many fights as possible in this game. The deepest run that I've made it through is Kinestia, before promptly giving up.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8384
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: How do you rank the games?

Postby Drool » February 14th, 2017, 11:17 pm

Oh, that's a pity. 3 has some great writing in it if you look. Hell, Kinestia has some pretty interesting philosophical questions that it raises.

Of course, 3 is much more interesting when you're punching above your weight class. I remember fighting in Gelidia against the mages when I wasn't quite ready for them. Balancing the Archmage's healing while the Chronomancer dropped LUCK was a lot of fun.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

balinor
Initiate
Posts: 16
Joined: May 6th, 2016, 2:49 am

Re: How do you rank the games?

Postby balinor » February 15th, 2017, 1:46 am

BT 1 and then I think I'd rank 2 and 3 equally. BT1 definitely is my favourite overall though but I'm not sure how much of that is nostalgia because that's the one I started on and played so many times before ever even seeing 2 or 3.

ZZGO
Novice
Posts: 32
Joined: October 4th, 2016, 1:33 am

Re: How do you rank the games?

Postby ZZGO » February 15th, 2017, 6:26 am

I have the best memories of Bard's Tale 1. But that may be heavily influenced by nostalgia - I was a wide-eyed kid and it was a game like nothing I'd seen or played before. It was awesome.

In hindsight, the best game is arguable part 3. It obviously had the most refined user interface and game engine, but it also had the best story and storytelling. Stackpole's writing skills show.
What BT3 gets minus points for is the (obviously extremely high) power level especially at the end, where you would basically NUKE your way through endless seas of enemies. It became so over the top that it broke immersion. It also broke the combat system, by rendering it redundant - the battles simply took place an order of magnitude above what the basically good combat system was written for.

Bard's Tale 2 was just too hard for me. I'd never have made it without a walkthrough, and so this title is mostly associated with frustration. (I dimly recall only making it into, perhaps even through, The Tombs, i.e. the first quest dungeon after the Dark Domain starter. Remember, I was just a kid.)
On the bright side, the wilderness and the various towns were great to explore.
The addition of ranged combat was so-so. It certainly was great for the first few dungeons, and would have been a real blast to have in BT1. But it was only an improvement to a combat system that, as a whole, wasn't meaningful anymore a few dungeons into the game, when the Archmages took over. See my complaints above about that.

Ether
Acolyte
Posts: 86
Joined: July 6th, 2015, 9:32 am

Re: How do you rank the games?

Postby Ether » February 17th, 2017, 4:45 am

When I was younger it was 3, 1, then 2.

Being older can appreciate the starting from scratch feel that bt 1 has, and that bigger isn't always better, so I view the two much more evenly.
Bt 3 gets props from me for actually telling a story, and inserting some really good ideas into the franchise.

I just remember not being able to hit anything on the c64 version of bt 2, and a lot of the puzzles and mazes were just too much. It amazes me than anyone could or would finish it on their own without help.

Ether
Acolyte
Posts: 86
Joined: July 6th, 2015, 9:32 am

Re: How do you rank the games?

Postby Ether » February 17th, 2017, 9:16 am

Btw, I will disagree about bt 3 only being about Nuke and other large spells.
The Hunter kills everything throughout the game.
The Monk does so through most of the game. It's not till Malefia where most creatures can survive his assault.
The Rogue even gets to kill in this one, albeit slowly.
Palladins and Warriors are left out, though the Stoneblade is a cheap solution. Of course, they can also become Geomancers.

Now yeah, if you run into twenty of something you'll probably want to cast a spell, but for the most part your fighters did have a function.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8384
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: How do you rank the games?

Postby Drool » February 17th, 2017, 8:45 pm

Ether wrote:Now yeah, if you run into twenty of something you'll probably want to cast a spell, but for the most part your fighters did have a function.

Yeah. Even with Mangar staffs knocking off 75% of the spell cost, I usually reserved NUKE, DIVA, and EAMA for extremely dangerous foes (like Black Slayers). And Vortexes just laughed at your NUKEs any way.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!


Return to “BT: Classic Tales”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest