Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!bwdls61.bnr.ca!bwdls58!bwdls40!keithh From: keithh@bwdls40.bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.games Subject: Re: REVIEW: Pool of Radiance Message-ID: <5220@bwdls58.UUCP> Date: 11 Jan 91 21:51:44 GMT References: <5206@bwdls58.UUCP> Sender: news@bwdls58.UUCP Reply-To: keithh@atreus.bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan) Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd. Lines: 219 In article lord_zar@ucrmath.ucr.edu (wayne wallace) writes: >keithh@bwdls40.bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan) writes: >> Pool of Radiance is a good game trapped within a terrible user interface. >I have some disagreement there. I have solved pool on the Amiga, so I'm in a >better position to judge than you, since I had to use the "terrible user >interface" far longer. Oh well excuse me! My professional expertise in human factors and user interface design counts for naught? I stand by my opinion and the mail I've received backs me up. Your ability to withstand the bad design issues is testimony to your patience, not the game writer's skill. Having said that, everybody is entitled to their own opinion. I think that my observations detailed below support my conclusion. >> big (484 vs 256). 16x16 is a little small and somewhat lacking in >> 'atmosphere'. There is also some wilderness adventure but I have not >> yet reached that state (and may never) so cannot comment on it. >Wilderness has some truly challenging encounters, including Phase Spiders, a >very deadly menace, totally unlike "40 kobold" fights. The wilderness adventure, regardless of how good it may be, is worth nothing to me if my patience (which is fair to exceptional) fails to hold out long enough for me to reach it. Your comments however will add to my patience. >> Speaking of detail: the walls have very little detail and >> perspective is not handled as well as in Bard's Tale. In BT, it is >> possible to map a great distance ahead, 5 or 6 sectors, if your >> light is good enough. In PoR, it is difficult to interpret the walls >> more than one sector distant. You must resort to the over-head, 2D >> 'Area' perspective that the game offers you. This also allows you to >> cheat somewhat although it doesn't show you where doors or arches >> are. >Why the hell are you even mapping ? The game provides it FOR you. If your >memory is poor enough that you need copious notes, xerox a friend's cluebook! >Oy. My memory is fine thank yo very much. However, if I set this game down for 6 months because I'm on my motorcycle, I wouldn't mind being able to return to the game next Christmas holiday. Besides, I like maps and drawing them is trivial. It is also a habit I got into running Bard's Tale. I would go so far as to say that the 'Area' command is a kludge put there to help cope with the poor perspective yielded by the 3D view. It certainly is unrealistic and acts as a cheat. As for cluebooks, if this game 'requires' a cluebook to complete, I'm going to return the goddam game. I don't cheat. >> o There is no type-ahead and the game uses polled i/o. This is >> unforgivable! While I am grateful that the game can be installed on >> my hard-drive and that it multitasks the polling chews up so much >> cpu as to seriously debilitate the Amiga's multi-tasking >> capability. The other side effect is that there is no type-ahead. This >> slows down game play interminably. In any game involving repetitive >> maze navigation, the player becomes accustomed to the key strokes >> necessary to move about. Consider movement in Bard Tale where it is >> possible to move the characters about very rapidly indeed. In PoR, >> this is impossible. >I experienced no problems. I frequently held down my forward cursor key to move, >and as for menus, I can't say. I'm not a fast enough typist (I might barely >make typing 101 from self-taught hunt&peck + some memorization of keyboard >layout. I'm definitely better than someone inexperienced) to encounter such a >problem. Hmmm. It certainly doesn't work for me. What I want to be able to do is enter the slums and pound out (substituting vi keys for arrow keys): kkhkkklklkkkkkhkkkkhklkklkhkkkkhkklkk to enter the Kato's Well. And then sit back and think while it moves my party. If it used proper Amiga exec input mechanisms, their code would be tighter and the game would be easiliy twice as enjoyable. >> o Every command and output message involves a very slow re-display >> of the text. This is bizzare and also contributes to the gameplay >> slow-down. It's doubly strange in light of the fact that the >> graphic display is updated very quickly indeed. >Dork. Encamp. Alter. Speed. Set it to zero or one. it starts on two. >Dork. Watch your lip. Now I know that. However: o If I slow the output down to a readable speed, it becomes too slow moving the party. Much much too slow. o If I speed the output up (to zero) - the game is still to slow (because it still refreshes the menu every keypress!) - a great deal of output gets obscured. o When your party is ambushed, they get initiative and strike first. The game doesn't give you the opportunity to slow down the text output until one of your PC initiative comes up. >> o On the other hand, output messages all appear in the same space >> and always overwrite each other. Frequently one misses the output >> entirely. In fact, due to the continual refreshing it is possible >> to be oblivious to the text and not even realize that you have >> missed it. If these last two comments sound like text display is >> paradoxically too fast and too slow simultaneously, that's about >> how I feel about it. It took a mighty poor design team to come up >> with this display mechanism. > >I agree. I don't suffer the problem, however, because I scan text faster than >80-90% of computer users I know, so I miss virtually nothing. Well we can't all be super-human. >> o The command menus are illogically ordered. Some items are >> accessible almost everywhere and others inaccessible except in >> special situations. For example, it is possible to 'pool' the group's >> funds when purchasing goods but not when purchasing training. >> Instead, you have to 'trade' money from character to character. >> This is only one of many examples. The designers made absolutely >> no attempt to streamline the menus according to frequency of player >> use. (Did they have play testers? Perhaps not - the credits don't >> mention any.) > >I hated this too. At least blades solved it by eliminating training costs. Now that's an intelligent solution. Ummm. What's 'blades'? >> Another problem I have with the combat is that there are too many >> 40-kobold attacks and not enough fewer-but-more-challenging-enemy >> attacks. This of course aggravates a combat system suffering from >> continual text re-refreshes. > >The last half of the game is better. Excuse me. LAST TWO MISSIONS. I agree. >Fodder is mostly all PCs (Player Characters) can handle at low levels(1-4). >Play Curse & Blades for challenging, non-fodder encounters!!!!!!! > >> o The graphics are very poor. I understand the requirement for >> portability but that doesn't require that they distribute the >> lowest quality graphics across all platforms. > >B.S. Pardon me? Perhaps you could elaborate. >Go buy Eye of the Beholder. Forgotten Realms. Waterdeep. 2ND EDITION!!!!!! >Out now or in 2 weeks. Advertisement in Dragon #165, out now. >You want graphics like Dungeon Master ? Buy Eye of the Beholder. New interface >similar to Dungeon Master. Open Dragon #165 to the center. Read right-side page. Errr. Could you describe the game? Have you played it? I'm curious. >Read the manual all the way thru. Once. You don't need it hardly any of the >time. I never used it after not even 1/8 of the way thru the game. >If you can't find a menu choice, pick a random one, and see if you get a sub- >menu. Some people complain over nothing. Write down what you get on a 3x5 card >if you need to. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. The problem with the manual is that you don't need to read it because there is no information content. It's been a decade since I've played AD&D and I had a lot of questions about how spells can be expected to behave. I dredged up my old manuals and they helped but I shouldn't need them. As for menus, I don't have a problem navigating though them, I just resent the counter-intuitive heirarchy. Face it: they are poorly layed out. >> o The game doesn't take advantage of all the memory available to do >> caching. Each sector is loaded and unloaded every time you enter >> and exit even if you have the memory to contain it. The same is >> true of character and monster graphics. Pretty mickey mouse. > >True, but I wouldn't call it mickey-mouse, I'd call it: >(heard from Electronics Boutique employee) >SSI sent source code to UBI Soft. UBI couldn't make an Amiga translation >exactly, + sounds & FX. UBI failed twice. SSI said screw it, took UBI's code, >which probably started to resemble Bard's Tale MCMLXXX, rewrote it into >Pool of Radiance proper, credited UBI for their code in the game, and shipped >it. Interesting. I can certainly believe it. It doesn't excuse them however. >>Hope this helps. Please pressure game producers and designers to work on >>their user interfaces! >Sounds k00l, but don't just be disgusted, you can still find enjoyment from >poorly designed games, by way of the story, game speed, etc. I'm perturbed by poor design because, as I said at the outset, Pool of Radiance is a good game, but it is difficult to enjoy because of all these little problems. And they are little problems. Not one of the suggestions I mentioned make the game more expensive or more difficult to produce. All they would require is professionalism. >Being a avid AD&D fan of either edition helps as well. How could I be a fan of AD&D after having played MERP? :-) I had a lot of fun with the original D&D (Duck Tower etc...) and then AD&D but there comes a time when you have to move on to something which encourages role-playing and discourages hack-and-slash. [In a nutshell, since this is another topic, the reason I dislike AD&D is that it constrains character development too much. There is not enough ability to tailor your character and so every 7th level fighter is pretty much the same. It is only possessions which describe the individual. Instead, consider MERP, or GURPS, or RoleMaster, or Chivalry & Sorcery, or DragonQuest, or WarHammer, or RuneQuest: each allows the character to acquire more specialized skills which help define his overall personality. For example, I prefer Jack-of-all-trades, even at the expense of absolute proficiency: thus Adalgrim, a Hobbit scout with some magic skills and some fighting skills. These magic skills were against his hobbitish nature and thus cost a great deal but I was able to do it. The multi-classing and double-classing of AD&D is too absolute and very clearly a rule imposed for play balance rather than realism. It is artificial and unnecessarily constraining. Please don't reply that the second edition permits this in effect because of all the new classes. :-)] Pax, Keith Hanlan keithh@bnr.ca Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada 613-765-4645