keithh@bwdls40.bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan) (01/11/91)
Following my flame of FUTURE WARS I had some questions about Pool of
Radiance (to which I had alluded). So for everybody's enjoyment:
Pool of Radiance is a good game trapped within a terrible user interface.
PoR is essentially a software version AD&D in the same vein as
Bard's Tale and Dungeon Master. It is not as good as either.
The game comes on two disks and can be installed on your hard-disk.
It uses a code-wheel copy protection scheme. Also included are two
booklets perhaps 50 pages total. One booklet concerns itself with
the mechanisms for play and the second is full of supplemental
information and is essential. You can save the game at any time
under one of 10 labels (A-J). To restore another game you must quit
out and start again. The game also multi-tasks (but see below) and
the game screen supports the Amiga-M and Amiga-N control keys.
In PoR, you create and control a party of adventurers that have travelled
to a city called Phlan. Phlan is an ancient city that fell many many
years ago. New Phlan is an attempt to reclaim the lost city from the
monsters which now inhabit it. There is a 'safe' reclaimed portion
and a number of sectors of unreclaimed city. These unreclaimed portions
include the slums, the Library of Mendor, Podal Plaza etc... Each
sector is 16x16 and typically has some conclusive encounter. For
comparison, Bard's Tale used 22x22 mazes which are nearly twice as
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.
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.
Pool of Radiance has a fair amount of game detail, there is an overall
mystery involved, and the play balance is pretty good. The game
itself would be very good indeed if they fixed up a few problems:
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.
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.
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.
How they managed to avoid learning about scroll-bars is beyond me.
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.)
o In keeping with the poor quality of information display, it is
impossible to examine a player's attributes during combat until it
is his turn to act. Further, once a character is injured, there is
no way, AT ALL, to determine what his full hit-points are. Thus
when a cleric wants to distribute healing, it is impossible to
distinguish between a character merely scratched (down 1 hp), and
a more seriously injured character (say, down 10hp). Strategy is
thus difficult to apply during a combat. Which fighter do you go
help when you can't tell whether either of them are bleeding?
o Combat in general has its own host of problems but most of these
are of the same flavour as mentioned above. Suffice to say it is
slow, slow, slow!! In keeping with AD&D, (where if you aren't
following the Gygax Gospel EXACTLY, well then, you are a stupid
heathen who doesn't merit the name 'gamer'), realism is pursued by
pasting kludges upon kludges, typically at the expense of
playability. Disengaging from combat is a good example: Even if
the enemy you are adjacent to has his hands full with three
adversaries, if you back away he gets a free strike at your rear
with bonuses.
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.
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.
Why don't the graphic artists draw in a high resolution and then
use one of the innumerable format conversion programs (the best of
which are free such as fbm and pbm) to 'scale down' the graphics
to each appropriate platform? In fact, the dithering etc that is
done by these programs is incredible and would result in better
looking graphics even for the EGA outputs.
o The manual has problems, largely stemming from the countless
nested single-line menus. It is difficult to find particular
topics and there is neither index nor cross-reference.
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.
o Apparently the sequel, Curse of the Azure Bonds, has made no
improvements and this fact, more than any other has convinced me
that the designers have absolutely no interest in professionalism.
Hope this helps. Please pressure game producers and designers to work on
their user interfaces!
Regards,
Keith Hanlan keithh@bnr.ca Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada 613-765-4645lord_zar@ucrmath.ucr.edu (wayne wallace) (01/11/91)
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. > 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. > 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. Otherwise, just note down which area (middle, NE corner, etc.) something important is in, and sketch the corridors within a 4x4 area of said places. > 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. > 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. > 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. > 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. > o In keeping with the poor quality of information display, it is > impossible to examine a player's attributes during combat until it > is his turn to act. Further, once a character is injured, there is > no way, AT ALL, to determine what his full hit-points are. Thus > when a cleric wants to distribute healing, it is impossible to > distinguish between a character merely scratched (down 1 hp), and > a more seriously injured character (say, down 10hp). Strategy is > thus difficult to apply during a combat. Which fighter do you go > help when you can't tell whether either of them are bleeding? Correct. I saw it first implemented as you request in Secret of the Silver Blades on my friend's C-64. It was nice of them to get around to it. Now if they'd just retrograde this to pool and curse. Myself, I simply remember it all. Don't ask me how. I know AD&D better than calculus :) > o Combat in general has its own host of problems but most of these > are of the same flavour as mentioned above. Suffice to say it is > slow, slow, slow!! In keeping with AD&D, (where if you aren't > following the Gygax Gospel EXACTLY, well then, you are a stupid > heathen who doesn't merit the name 'gamer'), realism is pursued by Go buy Eye of the Beholder. Forgotten Realms. Waterdeep. 2ND EDITION!!!!!! Out now or in 2 weeks. Advertisement in Dragon #165, out now. > pasting kludges upon kludges, typically at the expense of > playability. Disengaging from combat is a good example: Even if > the enemy you are adjacent to has his hands full with three > adversaries, if you back away he gets a free strike at your rear > with bonuses. Yes. And bouncing lightning bolts do damage twice. 2nd ed. changes this to one damage amount, 2 saves. Fail even one, and take full damage. > 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. 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. Out for IBM AND AMIGA SIMULTANEOUSLY!!!!!!! No mention of C-64, unfortunately. > Why don't the graphic artists draw in a high resolution and then > use one of the innumerable format conversion programs (the best of > which are free such as fbm and pbm) to 'scale down' the graphics > to each appropriate platform? In fact, the dithering etc that is > done by these programs is incredible and would result in better > looking graphics even for the EGA outputs. I'm all for it. > o The manual has problems, largely stemming from the countless > nested single-line menus. It is difficult to find particular > topics and there is neither index nor cross-reference. 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. > 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. > o Apparently the sequel, Curse of the Azure Bonds, has made no > improvements and this fact, more than any other has convinced me > that the designers have absolutely no interest in professionalism. Possibly true, but the encounters are better, and it might just be me, as a hybrid wargamer/role-player, but I liked Curse on my C-64, (didn't get around to solving it 'cause of slow old 1541) and will buy it for my Amiga. >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. Being a avid AD&D fan of either edition helps as well. >Regards, >Keith Hanlan keithh@bnr.ca Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada 613-765-4645 Regards, Wayne Wallace * // Only /\ |Lord Zar,Commander Of All He Surveys|Stay Alert! Trust * *\\ // /--\MIGA |(and hater of spaces near commas.) |No One! Keep--AHHHH* * \X/ Internet: lord_zar@ucrmath.ucr.edu QuantumLink & Portal: Lord_Zar * * I'm a Purple Hearts & Yellow Moons kinda guy; I'm vay-teeng for you, dahlink*
keithh@bwdls40.bnr.ca (Keith Hanlan) (01/12/91)
In article <lord_zar.663555491@ucrmath> 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): kkhkkklklkkkkkhkkkk<bash>hklk<bash>klkhkkkkhkklkk 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
daveb@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Berezowski) (01/29/91)
In article <1991Jan29.024906.29062@menudo.uh.edu> Keith (K.P.) Hanlan <KEITHH@bnr.ca> writes: >Pool of Radiance is a good game trapped within a terrible user >interface. PoR is essentially a software version AD&D in the same >vein as Bard's Tale and Dungeon Master. It is not as good as either. > >[ed. note: Does anyone use this on an A3000? Does it function?] > > Pool Of Radiance - A Review with commentary > ------------------------------------------- > > Title: Pool of Radiance - A Forgotten Realms Fantasy RPG Epic, Vol I > Publisher: Strategic Simulations, Inc. > 675 Almanor Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 > Genre: Adventure game a la Bard's Tale > Requirements: 1MB of memory >Copy Protection: Code wheel, can be installed on hard-disk. > > 'Pool of Radiance' and the followup 'Curse of the Azure Bonds' both are essentially quick ports to the Amiga from the IBM version. I have played both and agree that the user interface is lacking. If you want to play a good TSR game that has been completely Amiga'ized (graphics, sound, mouse, etc.) try 'Champions of Krynn'. Check out the neat demo mode in the store; I assume you'll be suitably impressed. daveb -- David Berezowski {caip,ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveb