[Wreck]

[Eivind]

Ah! Great game!

[Kurufinwe]

Yup, nice game. Not as good as Christy Marx's next one, but lots of good ideas.

[Ninth]

So. What game is that?

[Kolzig]

I'm just guessing, but is that Conquest of Camelot?

[Wreck]

Yup. Good ole' Arthur

[Cellardoor]

Oooh, evil looking guide with black clothes, a black textbox, and a moustache... Better not hire him, Arthur!

Wonderful game, albeit a bit copy protection-heavy.

[SoccerDude28]

Game looks very interesting Just wondering, why is Arthur in a desert talking to an Arabian guy?

[AFGNCAAP]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Just wondering, why is Arthur in a desert talking to an Arabian guy?

Wasn't he on a quest for Grail of some sort? It'd make sense to look for it in the Middle East, I think.

(Note: I haven't played the game, though.)

[Kurufinwe]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Wasn't he on a quest for Grail of some sort? It'd make sense to look for it in the Middle East, I think.

Yes, he was. And no, it wouldn't. The grail was always considered as being in Europe in the Arthurian times, long before it had become 'holy' and had gained a capital letter. But Christy Marx chose to completely re-invent the medieval tradition -- and after all, why not? (though I actually tend to believe that it didn't really work, but that would lead to a long development that I doubt anyone cares about)

[AFGNCAAP]

me, for talking about topics I know next to nothing about

I always imagined that Grail was supposed to be either more less in the area where Jesus lived (the Indiana Jones take) or in an geographically unspecified place (in Arhurian mythos). Needless to say, I should have actually studied some Arthurian legends before assuming it.

Originally Posted by Kurufinwe

The grail was always considered as being in Europe in the Arthurian times, long before it had become 'holy' and had gained a capital letter. But Christy Marx chose to completely re-invent the medieval tradition -- and after all, why not? (though I actually tend to believe that it didn't really work, but that would lead to a long development that I doubt anyone cares about)

Do tell more. Please?

[Kurufinwe]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

I always imagined that Grail was supposed to be either more less in the area where Jesus lived (the Indiana Jones take) or in an geographically unspecified place (in Arhurian mythos). Needless to say, I should have actually studied some Arthurian legends before assuming it.

The grail was invented by French author Chrétien de Troyes, in the unfinished romance Perceval, the tale of the grail (written c. 1190). The tale tells of a young naïve Arthurian knight who, in his wanderings, goes into the castle of the Fisher King, where he watches a procession centred around a mysterious vessel, but fails to ask the purpose of this procession, and because of this is denied the possibility to heal the Fisher King. Though it has some Christian attributes (it contains a Mass wafer and is accompanied by a bleeding spear), the whereabouts and significance of this vessel are never explained. The word Chrétien used was graal, a rare French word for a cup or vessel whose mysterious sounds probably held his attention.

About a century later, this mysterious vessel had swallowed the whole Arthurian world, structuring it into a cycle spanning from the biblical times to the foundering of the Arthurian world. In the process, the grail had become the Holy Grail, a cup in which Joseph of Arimathea received the blood of Christ at the crucifixion and which he brought to Europe. It was kept in a castle for centuries by his descendants until the chosen one would come and conquer it. One of the best Arthurian knights, Gawaine, failed pathetically, and even the best knight of his time, Launcelot, didn't succeed, because of his forbidden love for Gwenhyver, Arthur's wife. It was his son, the pure Galahad, who eventually became the Grail hero.

So, whichever version you base yourself upon, the grail was in Britain during the Arthurian times, and Arthur was not among the knights who went looking for it. But Christy Marx chose to make something different.

Do tell more. Please?

Maybe later, but typing the boring lecture above was tiresome enough. I really want to rest tonight, but I'll try and get back to it later.

[AFGNCAAP]

Thanks.

[Dasilva]

Originally Posted by Cellardoor

Wonderful game, albeit a bit copy protection-heavy.

Don't even remind me. lol Great game, a bit under-rated, its got some brilliant graphics.

[Kurufinwe]

So there's another boring long post from me, as promised.

In the Western culture, the Grail has become a very powerful symbol, the importance of which grew with each retelling of the tales. When one embarks on a rewriting of the Grail stories, it is impossible to escape that large web of (often only semi-conscious) images which are associated with that item, and one must find one's place inside that complex network.

The Grail is first and foremost associated with the idea of the quest, and of wandering. It is the perfect quest object, a vessel whose very odd-sounding name evokes mystery and power, a vessel whose location is unknown and can only be found by wandering in the world and passing several trials. The theme of wandering knights was of course at the heart of medieval literature, but it runs deeper than that, being a call for movement, exploration, a desire to change one's own fate, that lies at the heart of the Western mind.

But the Grail cycle is also organised in three 'periods', the Grail being the instrument of the transitions between those. The second period is the Arthurian world, whose values are earthly chivalry and courtly love, and whose heroes are Gawaine and Launcelot. But this world is eventually presented as flawed, unsatisfying in regard to the Holy Grail. The values of the Arthurian world are not perfect enough to attain the holiness that the Grail represents, and they eventually destroy themselves. As such, the Grail becomes the instrument of a criticism of medieval chivalry, presented as inferior to the stricter, whiter-than-white (so to speak), Christian values. And yet the tales dwell much more on the Arthurian system, with a not-so-critical eye, and its downfall is told with much sadness and nostalgia. This is completely typical of the Western world's love-hate relationship with absolutes and ideals, between fascination for their simple perfection and rejection of the mindless (and often undeserved) sacrifices they demand.

As a matter of fact, the Grail really is the embodiment of the Western culture, both because the tales related to it came from numerous influences (the enchanted Celtic world, the strength of the Germanic spirit, a Latinised Christianity, and more) and because it is completely typical of its treatment of some of the most important themes. And, as I said, all of this is inescapably associated with it in the collective minds of the Western peoples. Once again, adding anything to so powerful a myth without appearing weak, shallow, or simply jarring, is a daunting task.

And Christy Marx, I feel, was not up to it. Her take on the Grail is given in the game's manual:

But there is no doubt that the Grail legend itself is firmly based upon the much more ancient myths of the Sacred Cup of the Goddess. In virtually every mythology in every culture, the cup or chalice or cauldron in a symbol of feminine power, the ability to create life and grant fertility. . . . That the Grail is really the Sacred Cup of the Goddess is inescapable.

From a historical and literary point of view, that is a gross oversimplification (though certainly not completely wrong: the theme of the cup that grants life is indeed much older than Chrétien). But the real problem is that, in her game, the Grail almost completely disappears behind 'the Goddess', especially in the second half (which takes place in the Near-East).

And you just can't do that. The Grail is far too important a myth, it evokes far too many things, to be just reduced as a mere prop, overshadowed by that 'Goddess' figure (contrast that with Spielberg's take, which builds a new story, but makes full use of the symbolic and thematic tradition of the Grail, and as such is considerably strengthened by the centuries-old force of that myth). And that failure is worsened by the fact that Christy Marx never really manages to 'sell' her Goddess. She just appears as a very shallow feminine archetype, whose only characteristic seems to be her universality (half of the characters keep droning on about that, and only that). Instead of developing precisely some versions of the myth of the Sacred Cup of the Goddess, and slowly letting the player realise their universality, she just asserts that it is so, and that's that.

There is doubtlessly a certain universality in the theme of the protecting, motherly, feminine figure, just as in the cup that gives life. But just saying 'it's universal', without going deeper into the reason why it can be powerful enough to be universal just comes across as shallow and weak. I understand that Christy Marx wanted to do something very ambitious around the Goddess, but it just ended up looking like new-age hogwash. And trying to do something that ambitious through furthermore trying to attack, diminish, as powerful a myth as the Grail was certainly not a wise idea.

This is furthered by the fact that she can't seem to fully detach herself from the Grail myths, and seems unsure of the exact status she wants to give to that vessel. A typical example of this is the theme of the transition from paganism to Christianity. The Arthurian legends were often of Celtic and pagan origins, though some Christian polish was eventually applied to them (see for instance the Lady of the Lake, originally a water spirit, who, by the 13th century, had become the benevolent and pious foster mother to Launcelot); but the Grail stories were the first 'fully Christian' stories, that is, stories imagined in a Christian context and in which the Christian religion plays a central part. And because the heroes of those latter tales succeed in the quest for the Grail while those of the former fail, the Grail tales implicitly claim the superiority of their cosmogony and moral universe over the still-charged-with-pagan-influences ones of the older stories. This transition is an extremely powerful theme in the medieval tales, one that has the gravitas of the motion of the very wheels of History, one that has the elevating grandeur (as well as the chilling iciness) of a million pipe organs booming in unison. Christy Marx chose to try and use this theme is her game, but how could it work within the framework of her story? At the end of the game, the Goddess gives the Grail to Arthur, and then explains that, well, the world is changing, she's getting bored with it, so she (seemingly along with the other pagan deities) is going to to go on holiday, leaving the world to the new Christ god. And then, in Camelot, where shrines for Mithras (a male, pagan, warlike god) and Christ stood side by side, Mithras' symbol disappears, leaving only the Christian cross. This is reminiscent of the medieval theme, but, here, it doesn't work at all, because the Grail, which was the symbol and agent of the transition, has here been reduced to a mere prop, and one that was not Christian (that is, on the 'winner's' side) but belonging to the Goddess, whose disappearance is inexplicable after the game has spent so long asserting her power.

Now, of course, if you forget about that general thematic problem, the game itself worked rather well. More importantly, it had many great ideas, both for storytelling and gameplay; they weren't always perfectly well implemented, but they were there.

And they would be there again, this time working perfectly well, in her masterpiece: Conquests of the Longbow.