"The Legend of Kyrandia: Fables & Fiends" Review
 

Nice review, Michael. Whilst I'm not actually a huge fan of the original (the sequel, Hand of Fate, is much better if you ask me; which you don't!), you did persuade me to dig out my CD collection of these games to give them a whirl. So thanks for that :).

Hehe, no problem. Hope you have fun reliving some artifacts of classic adventure gaming... Until I did this review, it had been years since I last played an "oldie."

I's nice to see how this series actually got better as it went along, instead of the usual scenario where sequels just get worse. Hand of Fate was a definite improvement, and Malcolm's Revenge was, arguably, the best of the series*

I always lamented that Westwood didn't do more adventures (and RPG's, though unfortunately the later Lands of Lore games were not at all that good I'm afraid!). And now they're dead. Sad turn of events, that. At least we've got some mighty fine titles thanks to them!


*Arguably, because it's quite a departure from the established themes, but very qualitative overall.

Wow, four stars for Kyrandia I? That's, um, very generous. ;)

What can I say? I guess I'm a very generous kind of guy... :P

Kyrandia 1 was great. 2 was a bit better, and I never really got into the third at all. 3 1/2 or 4 stars is justified, I think.

:) Thanks AGA. Although I can see how not everyone would have been fans... and, of course, we are all entitled to our opinions. I'm looking forward to continue delving into the series. I'm curious as to whether or not the games get better or worse.

Well, it's an interesting discussion. Kyrandia II is generally regarded as a superior game than Kyrandia I. And, since Kyrandia I got 4 stars, that should in theory make Kyrandia II a 5-star masterpiece. Except it's not. Which is just another way of saying that 4 stars for Kyrandia I seems inflated. I mean, 4 stars should be reserved for a nearly flawless game--and Kyrandia I doesn't approach that. It's a nice little game that tried to mimic King's Quest at a time when King's Quest was the bestselling series of all time. It succeeded in some areas and failed miserably in others. Two, maybe 2.5 stars, tops. My two cents. ;)

I can't say that I agree with this statement. Our own policy defines a 4-star game as "a game of very high quality." That certainly allows for a superior game with some notable weaknesses. I haven't played the Kyrandia games myself, so I have no opinion about whether the game actually deserves even that, but the review justifies its score.

As for another game being better, well, there are two ratings above a 4, but even another 4-star game could be considered better. The stars represent a range, and having the same score doesn't mean those games are equal.

It's a nice little game that tried to mimic King's Quest at a time when King's Quest was the bestselling series of all time.

Kyrandia was not only one of the most beautiful and breathtaking adventures for its time, it was also innovative. It's silly to say that it was a clone of KQ games, because both have very little in common. Of course, there is a kingdom, based on fantasy universe, and you have to save it. That's all. The same senario was in Simon the Sorcerer, in Death Gate and Shannara, in Dragon Sphere, Redguard, Eternam and many more. Where they all clones of KQ (which, by the way, was more of a fairy tale, then fantasy)? Not, for sure.

And they are all among the very best AGs.

Very good review. I think you gave it a good rating. This was one of the first adventure games I played and I loved it, although I never managed to find the sequels.

About the rating...
Granted, Kyrandia 1 is heavily flawed, but it still has got something magical, especially the graphics: even though the game is old, they don't look outdated, and give the game a special atmopshere, much better in my opinion than any King Quest.

I played a bit of Hand Of Fate years ago at a friend's computer. Blonde bland chick running through the woods. At least, that was my impression of it. :D I'll give it another try.

Erm. Jaz? I'm in need of an extra large frying pan, possibly with some spikes under it or something... :shifty:

Seriously, even though you begin in woods, you end up visiting the whole world and beyond (well, some small part of it, anyway). And Zanthia is not bland :pan: , and she not running.

Wait, a heavily flawed game with good graphics is 4-star worthy? Oy...

Innovative? Enlighten me, please. You walk around collecting random jewels in the woods, you get lost in a maze, etc. It had a bland hero with zero personality. It had a predictable plot. The only thing it had in its favor, really, was its graphics. And when it was released, it was billed as Westwood's response to the KQ phenomenom. It was meant to be a King's Quest clone.

It's not just the graphics, it's the whole atmosphere, graphics, music, interface, story...
The only really big flaw in Kyrandia is the gameplay, and more precisely the puzzle design is stupid.

Haha, I only now suddenly realized I didn't even LOOK at the ratings. Seriously, it's all so redundant. Read the text and you'll get a far better grasp of the reviewer's intention than some silly rating. That's only good for rather pointless debate over comparisons between stars or percentages.

But, but, but... that makes WAY too much sense! :)