Wednesday, July 16, 2025

Game 554: Castle of the Winds: Part One - A Question of Vengeance (1992)

I suspect I'm going to choose vengeance.
        
Castle of the Winds: Part One - A Question of Vengeance 
SaadaSoft (developer); Epic MegaGames (publisher, as shareware)
Released 1992 for Windows 3 
Date Started: 7 July 2025
Date Ended: 9 July 2025
Total Hours: 8
Difficulty: Moderate (3.0/5)
Final Rating: (to come later)
Ranking at time of posting: (to come later)  
         
Castle of the Winds was probably a lot of players' entry point into the roguelike (or, more appropriately, "roguelite") world. It isn't the first graphical roguelike, but it's one of the few that had any kind of widespread distribution. Because author Rick Saada worked at Microsoft, he was able to develop the game for Windows 3.1 long before the OS was released. It came out just as the average person started to access the Internet, and thus right as the shareware scene exploded. As such, if you Google the game today, you'll see that it has a lot more recognition than any of the titles that inspired it. Most of its players were probably unaware of those titles or of the larger roguelike genre.
        
Castle's clear origin point is Moria (1983); you see it in the town level, the types of inventory items, the spell list, the automap system, the way the "Return" spell creates a charge in the air around you and then makes you wait a few rounds before you actually teleport. It simplifies many of the mechanics, which I find too bad, and I normally wouldn't countenance such simplification in the name of a tile set and a few icons. But it also offers some significant improvements, including:
    
  • A detailed, evolving story. I've never understood why other roguelike titles (as well as games in the Dungeon Master line) are so reluctant to occasionally interrupt the action with some bits of text. Here, you get regular plot updates and they're even somewhat interesting. You can review what you've already learned by choosing "Review Story" on the "File" menu.
  • An improved interface. You know me: I like keyboards. How do you "improve" upon a classic roguelike interface like Moria's, where every action is mapped to its own key? The answer is, you keep that, and then you add the option do to certain things with a mouse, such as targeting enemies who aren't in your column or row, or dragging items from your pack to your various inventory slots, or right-clicking on an enemy to see how much damage he's taken. All of that is possible here.
  • Excellent documentation. At any point in the game, you can click on the "Help" menu to get a list of commands, monster descriptions, spell descriptions, and weapon values.
       
This is the kind of weapon documentation every game should have.
       
Where the recently-covered Magus (1993) made me wish I could just play Moria instead, Castle is a game I would rather play than Moria. You'd think I could make that statement more often when we're talking about a ten-year gap, but alas. Ask me about The Ormus Saga II and Ultima III, for instance.
     
The PC is presented as an orphan raised by two kindly godparents. He knows nothing about his background except that he was found with an amulet. Around his 18th birthday, while he was away from home, marauders raided, pillaged, and burned his godparents' farm, stealing the amulet, leaving two charred corpses behind. Monstrous footprints led away from the scene towards some northern mountains.
     
Character creation begins that simplification process I talked about. All characters are the same fighter/mage/cleric/thief combo, although the player can set attributes (strength, intelligence, constitution, dexterity) to whatever he likes. He can upload his own icon and set a difficulty level from "easy" to "experts only." His first spell comes from a small list, with options like "Heal Minor Wounds," "Light," and "Magic Arrow."
          
Character creation. Since the author worked at Microsoft, I would have expected the option to label those columns with the actual values.
         
The character starts with around 5-10 hit points, 5-10 mana points, and 1500 copper pieces in a little hamlet south of the burned farmhouse. It has a couple of useless buildings and about half a dozen shops and services:
   
  • Olaf's Junk Store, which will buy just about anything, including cursed items and rusted armor.
  • Snorri the Sage, who will identify items until you get the "Identify" spell. You want to do this, as uncursing items is prohibitively expensive.
  • Bjorn the Blacksmith, who buys and sells weapons. As you level up, the items sold get more advanced.
  • Gunnhild's General Store, where you buy and sell cloaks, scrolls, potions, boots, belts, and packs.
  • The Temple of Odin, where you can get healed and restored. You can also pay 1,000 copper pieces to get sent back to the lowest level of the dungeon that you've explored, at least until you get the "Rune of Return" spell on your own.
          
Buying my first belt.
      
As you can tell from some of these names, the game leans into a Norse theme, although until the end, it's mostly just names. Still, I suppose I prefer it to the constant regurgitation of Tolkien characters. 
     
North of town is a large screen with nothing to do but visit the burned-out homestead and walk north to the cave system where the monsters came from. This is where the game really "starts." My understanding is that the first level of these caves, and of the game's second dungeon, are fixed. The rest are randomly-generated when you arrive, but unlike Moria, they don't reset when you leave and return. The levels are full of traps, damaging runes, and secret doors, all of which can be found with a S)earch.
     
There are no enemies, and not much to do, in the outdoor areas.
       
The core gameplay is about exploring these dungeon levels, killing enemies, and collecting items to make your character stronger. There are multiple types of enemies—animals, humanoids, undead—and they get progressively harder as you go down. Some can attack from a distance—the manticore's barbs are particularly deadly—and some have status effects, like poison and temporary attribute drains. You fight with melee weapons and spells, but not missile weapons.
           
A gelatinous cube chases me through a dungeon room with a rune and a gas trap.
      
In contrast to most roguelikes, I found that I really couldn't survive without offensive spells. Some enemies just grind your hit points down so fast, you don't want to get anywhere near them. I had a lot of trouble with Level 1 characters until I created a new one with "Magic Arrow" as his first spell. Even late in the game, I was avoiding a lot of enemies by blasting them with "Lightning Bolt" and then escaping with "Phase Door" when they got too close.
     
Hit points restore at a pretty good clip as you walk around, but magic points are very slow to recharge. You need to find safe spaces to rest, which can be difficult, especially since enemies continually spawn. The overall challenge is well-balanced. One thing that makes the game a "roguelite" rather than a "roguelike," however, is that death isn't permanent. You can save and reload from anywhere. There's also no food system, which was mostly a waste of time in Moria anyway, and although there's a clock, there's no time limit.
       
Not the problem that this would be in a lot of roguelikes.
       
I like the inventory system a lot. Encumbrance depends on both weight and size of objects, and it slows down your movement speed when you get particularly laden. It's worth paying to have new items identified before trying them on; most of my early-game gold went to this expense. It was a relief when I finally got "Identify" for myself and could save my money for some of the tantalizing items the stores were starting to offer. I found plenty of upgrades in the dungeon itself, of course, and soon my small wooden shield became a medium steel shield and then an enchanted steel shield. There are "enchanted" versions of just about everything. With slots for weapons, armor, necklace, helmet, cape, shield, bracers, gauntlets, belt, boots, pack, purse, and two rings, you're almost always getting some kind of upgrade.
 
I found usable items less useful. Potions, wands, and spell scrolls all take time to use, opening yourself up to a couple of free hits in combat. If you save them for when you're desperate, you can easily get killed trying to use them.
       
The intuitive inventory interface.
      
Leveling is a somewhat lesser part of character development, occurring only about once per game hour (more frequently towards the beginning) and conferring extra health, mana, and one spell per level. You also get spells permanently from spellbooks and temporarily from scrolls. They're all very useful, although I've never understood Moria's system of applying "Light" to the room rather than the character.
        
Learning a new spell upon leveling up.
     
The spellbook can hold as many spells as you want, but you can select 10 to be hotkeyed from the "Spell" menu and to appear on the upper-right icon bar. Again, I usually give the keyboard the prize when it comes to efficiency, but I admit that clicking on a single icon is easier than hitting C)ast, then having to ? the spellbook because I don't remember the order of the spells, then hit the number associated with the spell.  
     
The game offers no sound. The graphics are mostly utilitarian and not terribly evocative. Every once in a while, the author places something like a statue or a fountain in a dungeon room to give it some character. 
       
Oh, that's so cute. Some of the little kobolds are still tucked in their little beds.
        
One such place was Level 4 of the first dungeon (the "mine"), where I found a bunch of kobolds sleeping on straw mats. A scrap of paper on their floor hit the first plot beat. It was signed with an "S." and told the receiver to "return to the fortress north of Bjarnarhaven" once his target was dead.
   
When I left the dungeon after finding this message, I found to my horror that the raiders had returned, this time burning down the entire town. This led my character to realize that he, specifically, was being targeted. "You swear once again to exact vengeance against those responsible."
        
Well, sorry everyone.
      
At this point, the player can travel west from the mines (via a road closed off earlier) to the village of Bjarnarhaven. It has the same services as the opening village, although wearable items and magic items are now split into two shops. There's a bank, and a neat aspect of the game is that deposited money remains available to spend, as if it were still in your pockets. The idea is that you're basically writing checks on your account.
       
I'm sure you folks will be okay, though.
      
There is indeed a fortress north of the city, a small fixed first floor giving way to 10 more lower floors. Gameplay remains the same as before, with the enemies getting harder. Fortunately, by this point I had the "Rune of Return" spell and could go back and forth from town as necessary. 
         
The automap of the fortress's first level. The levels below this one are larger and random.
       
On Level 5 of this fortress, I found a note ordering its recipient to patrol the fortress carefully, as "Hrungnir fears we have missed our quarry," and Hrungnir had already reported to his boss that he had completed the mission.  
     
After a lot more fighting, leveling, and so forth, I found the next plot point in a room on Level 11. Hrungnir turned out to be a Jotun (giant). He confirmed that I was his target. "My lord need never know of my initial failure." He attacked me with a squad of ogres and was capable of hurling boulders from a distance. I only won the battle using hit and run tactics (via "Phase Door").
       
Shooting a lightning bolt at the Jotun.
       
When Hrungnir falls dead, the character has a moment of satisfaction but is then racked by questions: "Who sent this Hrungnir? To whom or what did he report? Why were you selected to receive his malign attentions?" The character recovers his birthright amulet from the giant's body. This shows up in the inventory as the "Enchanted Amulet of Kings." 
   
I wasn't sure what to do at this point, and I spent some time bumbling about the dungeon and town before I realized I could use the amulet from the "activate" menu. The text related that it enveloped me in a warm glow and showed me a vision of my father. He introduced himself as "Prince Arvi," and said that the amulet's power let us meet somewhere between the nether realm and Midgard. He said that 18 years ago, the royal family got "enmeshed in a great conflict between the Aesir Thor and the trickster Loki." As a part of this conflict, the fire giant Surtur has come to Midgard, which wasn't supposed to happen until Ragnarok. Surtur is Hrungnir's master. My destiny, my father said, is to "thwart Surtur's designs on Midgard" and "reclaim our fallen Castle of the Winds!" I appreciate that because I was wondering what the title was about.  
      
My heritage becomes clear.
        
Finally, Arvi said that if I used the amulet again, it would teleport me to a town near the castle. At the castle, I will be able to confer with the ghost of my grandfather, King Lifthransir. I suspect he's going to tell me about the bane, as the subtitle of Castle of the Winds: Part Two is Lifthransir's Bane—although at one point, it must have been The Fall of Surtur.
         
No Y2K problems in this game.
        
In a GIMLET, I give the game:
        
  • 5 points for the game world. I enjoyed the plot and the use of Norse themes.
 
Some well-written text describes my meeting with Hrungnir.
        
  • 2 points for character creation and development. There isn't enough personalization of the character, alas, and I would have liked more variety in character classes.
          
My mid-game character sheet.
        
  • 0 points for no NPC interaction. The author missed an opportunity to really flesh out the world.
  • 3 points for encounters and foes. The foes are pretty standard, but with a decent variety of special attacks. I give a point here for the detailed descriptions in the manual. There are no non-combat encounters or puzzles except for the contextual encounter before the last battle.
      
I admittedly already had a pretty good handle on what "goblin" was, but I still love reading paragraphs like this.
        
  • 4 points for magic and combat. It has a well-balanced magic system and encourages you not to ignore it. I wouldn't have minded some missile weapon options.
  • 6 points for equipment. There are a lot of equipment slots and a decent variety of things to put in them. More important, it's always clear when you have an upgrade.
      
My endgame equipment.
      
  • 6 points for the economy. Not terribly complex, but rewarding, especially at the beginning of the game. 
  • 2 points for a main quest. There are, alas, no side-quests or choices.
  • 3 points for graphics, sound, and interface. The graphics are nothing special, but they don't interfere. As I reported, the interface works well, although I think it could have been a bit easier to use an item (you have to drag it to a belt slot or your free hand, then click "Activate," then choose the item).
  • 5 points for gameplay. It's linear and not very replayable, but I found the difficulty and length both pitched exactly right.
   
That's a final score of 36. That's very close to the 38 I gave Moria, and if you look at the scores, you can see how the simplifications that Castle makes just about equal out its innovations. But as I said, I'd rather play another round of Castle than Moria (although not overwhelmingly so), so go figure. 
      
I'd like to get vengeance on this cover artist.
       
Computer Gaming World introduced a column on shareware gaming, written by Chuck Miller, in its December 1992 issue. This was just in time for Miller to review Castle of the Winds in 1993. Reading his column, I'm surprised to see him recognize its Moria roots, and even more surprised that he drops Moria's name with no explanation, as if the average reader could be expected to know what it was. I somehow didn't think that freeware roguelikes were as prominent in the average reader's vocabulary in 1993. Anyway, he liked the game, praised the interface, but criticized the lack of sound effects.
      
Author Rick Saada was a Cleveland native and Princeton University graduate who spent eight years at Microsoft during the company's formative years. He would have been in his late 20s when he put the finishing touches on Castle. Later in the 1990s, he moved to Flying Lab software and worked on Rails Across America (2001) and the MMO Pirates of the Burning Sea (2008). He ran his own company called Holospark from 2015-2019; its primary output was an action game called Earthfall (2017). Since 2019, Saada has served as the CEO for Earthfall's publisher, Nimble.
         
I like Lifthransir's Bane better. The Fall of Surtur feels like a spoiler.
        
Dating Castle of the Winds is difficult, and even now I'm not sure of the precise timeline. I believe the copyright date of 1989 is when Saada began working on it. A couple of sites online have the date as 1992, which seems possible given Computer Gaming World's January 1993 coverage, but I cannot find any mentions of the game in pre-1993 media. In any event, Part One was distributed as freeware. Those who paid the $25 registration fee received Part Two. There's no suggestion that this took a year, so I cannot countenance the opinion of many sites that Part Two is a 1994 game. It is, however, a completely different set of files, so I have to regard it as a unique title. I'll give it a try after an Ormus Saga break.
 
Edit from a day later: Based on this site that Busca linked to, which offers several early version of the game, it appears that the author was circulating versions of the game around his co-workers at Microsoft as early as 1990. It also appears that Epic MegaGames was offering it for sale by mid-1992, so I have changed the date accordingly. 
 

26 comments:

  1. This brings back so many memories. I can remember spending hours playing that game on my dad’s work computer in the early 90s, much to his annoyance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Huh, Castle of the Winds is a game I'd heard of a lot over the years. This is the first time I've actually seen it, and it seems as though it's a lot shorter and simpler than its reputation would have had me believe. While it's certainly not the game's fault, it feels like the first time I've been disappointed by a game on this blog.

    Not having permadeath being (one of) your distinctions between roguelike and roguelite is interesting to me. I know that permadeath is generally held to be one of the core tenets of a roguelike, but I've long held that that naturally arises as it meshes well with the other facets that do make a roguelike; neither JauntTrooper (Mission Thunderbolt/Firestorm) has permadeath, but I'd hotly contest that they're no less roguelikes for it.
    (I'm not saying your definition is wrong either; especially with the advent of 'modern roguelikes' muddying it even more I don't think we'll ever see a unified definition of the genre that people will agree on, so there isn't really a right and wrong anymore.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think most people talking about Castle of the Winds are including both parts in the analysis, since this was essentially just the demo. Part 2 is substantially larger and generally more interesting.

      Permadeath (or at least significant reload limitations) is an important element of roguelikes because of how it combines with procedural generation to require you to develop a contingency-based method of play. If you can see something happens. Being able to retry a challenge repeatedly results in completely different gameplay than classic roguelikes.

      Delete
    2. Ah, is that right? It read to me more like a sequel than a part 2. Fair enough then, I suppose I'll have to wait on the blog getting to the rest of it.

      (I seem to have typed a massive amount of text again to the point this needs to be split over multiple comments, sorry.)

      I don't disagree that permadeath goes well with roguelikes, but, along with procedural generation I consider them consequential features rather than defining ones; they're (usually) there because they go hand-in-hand with the genre so well but they don't define it - imagine an FPS where the enemies didn't fight back, it'd still unarguably be an FPS but it would be a pretty awful gameplay experience. This doesn't mean a game having 'enemies that fight back' defines it as being an FPS, though.

      To me, for game genres to serve any purpose at all as a useful means of classification, they have to incorporate the feel of the game. While the specific systems may prove to be wildly different, if you play an FPS, you know you're getting a certain 'feel' of navigating 3d (or pseudo-3d) environments from a first-person perspective and fighting enemies in real time. Broadly speaking, you should be able to say you (don't) enjoy a genre.
      Knowing a game has permadeath and procedural generation doesn't tell you a thing about what to actually expect from the gameplay and so I can't consider them to be the key indicators of a genre. To me, the defining features of a roguelike would be the things like they're turn-based, so you have all the time in the world to think about what you're going to do and this is important because there's a wide breadth of options, both in combat and in broader terms of navigating an area, planning out where to go next, that sort of thing. You see an enemy and rather than the game going 'okay you must fight it now, here are your three options in combat', you can maybe close the distance, use ranged weapons, throw other objects in lieu of having proper ranged weapons, drink or throw any number of potions, read scrolls, cast spells, perhaps use some other specific interaction with the monster or the environment, or maybe decide you don't need to deal with that particular monster after all. As for evasion, you can maybe use those potions/scrolls/spells to run faster, or maybe shut and lock doors, or dig a hole in the floor to jump through... point is you potentially have a massive amount of options at your disposal to deal with an equally varied number of obstacles.
      The other key thing is that you are (more-or-less) never forced forward. If you don't think you're strong enough to press onto the next area, you don't have to. You can stay where you are and try and get better equipment, or maybe go to a different area and try your luck there - in stark contrast to modern 'roguelikes' like Faster Than Light and Slay the Spire, where if the game hasn't chanced to furnish you with the tools to beat the upcoming boss, tough, you're fighting it next anyway. Primarily if you die in a roguelike it's because you made mistakes (or were the victim of some very unfortunate RNG, or were very low level and really didn't have a better option than 'melee the monster and hope it dies first'), be they in-the-moment in combat mistakes or broader ones like thinking you were prepared for an area when you weren't.

      Delete
    3. Procedural generation works well with these things because it requires you to learn the game's systems and how to apply them to various situations rather than just learning a set of moves that works to get you through, but its absence wouldn't change the feel, it'd just make the game lose replayability.

      Permadeath... while I respect a game's rules and don't savescum, I'm not actually sure how much this adds to the experience. If you think you're ready for some area or obstacle and you're not, being able to retry it repeatedly isn't going to change that. And in the case where you've been bouncing magic missiles around a corner to kill blue dragons without being breathed on with a pretty late-game character, then finally slip on the multi-key input you've been repeatedly making the past 30 turns and instantly die by bouncing a magic missile through yourself 22 times... I'm not sure I feel having to start over adds to the experience either.
      I do enjoy feeling there are actual stakes and there is something to actually lose if I screw it up, but I feel oftentimes permadeath just leads you to overprepare for everything just in case, leaving you with mainly the stupid deaths. As such, I don't think losing permadeath is enough to markedly change the gameplay experience.

      Delete
    4. Oof, sorry for the lack of formatting in the second half of the first comment. I already don't want to read it upon glancing at it and I typed the damn thing.

      Delete
    5. I sometimes get the feeling that there are two philosophies about permadeath which are at odds with each other. One is "Dying should hurt. The player should be punished for not being adequately prepared. They should suffer the pain of losing the things they liked about this character, their accomplishments, their cool swag." I do not like this.

      On the other hand, there's a philosophy that says "This isn't supposed to be the sort of game where you become hugely invested in a single run. This is a game where starting fresh from the beginning is something you should be okay with doing early and often. The player should play with the expectation that their character is a mayfly and not get too invested. Permadeath discourages the player from obsessing too much over one particular run and frees them to be willing to start over if things aren't working out."

      And these philosophies produce radically different play styles: the first making you cautious and making you angry when your plans fail. the other makes you take big risks for low-probability rewards because why not go out in a blaze of glory after all?

      I don't think roguelikes do enough to ensure that the player develops the "right" philosophy. Maybe that's something that modern "run-based" games are better at - the games where you keep "important" bits of progress, but lose other things.

      Delete
    6. Kalieum, I appreciate the detail of your analysis, and I mostly agree with you. I like consequences to death in most RPGs, but not to the extent of permadeath. I think those BBS games offered a nice balance: When you died, you were kicked out of the game and couldn't play again until tomorrow.

      Overall, though, a "roguelite" is distinguished from a "roguelike" by easier, simplified gameplay. So I would say permadeath is ONE of the features that, when removed, makes COTW a roguelite. Simpler inventories, fewer combat tactics, a smaller bestiary, and a simplified command system are some of the others.

      Delete
    7. ADOM I have always been chipper about a reset but not so much other roguelikes. I think the reason why is that ADOM lends itself to alternate routes and there are aspects of the game that genuinely encourage you to be faster without ever setting a hard time limit. So I get the feeling "oh I could do the game up to that point better" or "maybe I can try putting quest X first before I do thing Y". Whereas with something closer aligned to Angband, I feel like "now I have to spend 40+ hours repeating the exact same steps I just did with only slight differences" and that's where it gets really painful for me.

      Delete
    8. The way I see it is that "learning the level/world layout"(other types of rpgs, plus more lenient roguelikes) is fundamentally different to "learning the mechanics without map knowledge as a safety net"(traditional roguelikes). In the case of the latter, if you know that, say, a +5 longsword is located on floor 5 or whatever, you'll try to beeline for the weapon in question, pick it up and then go back to the previous floors to mop up everything that you left behind. In the case of the former, you don't know where said +5 longsword is located or if it even exists in the current run. Because you don't have map knowledge to fall back on, knowing how all the game's items, weapons, enemies and such interact with one another becomes far more important.

      Delete
    9. Since I can't edit, correction: I mixed up former and latter

      Delete
  3. Maybe "Lifthransir's Bane" was a little too on-the-nose in a Tolkien sense ("Durin's Bane"). Not that "Fall of Surtur" is any less blatant, of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it wasn't clear from my entry, Lifthransir's Bane was the NEW (and final) name.

      Delete
  4. Hey! That was my introduction to rogue-like (sans ironman in this case) indeed, though of course I had no idea this subgenre had a name.

    I had also fond memory of this game, but was unable to remember its name, so thanks a lot for that!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the way roguelikes are played, replaying the game with new characters over and over again until you learn the mechanics well enough to survive until the end, is a bit at odds with an elaborate story. I noticed this when replaying Alpha Centauri recently. It's cool to have a story in a strategy game, but after one or two playthroughs, it just becomes bothersome text that you click away.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can imagine a roguelike where story events act as savepoints in the game, but the story events are so far apart that death is still relevant.

      Delete
    2. Legerdemain (by Nathan Jerpe) is a free and pretty good roguelike that has a lot of story, and uses the towns as 'respawn' points, if I remember right. It doesn't have you move a new character through story segment checkpoints, though. Mangui is a modern commercial roguelike where you take characters (who are functionally different classes) through their own stories.

      Delete
  6. Returnal is one game where roguelike is combined with a story.

    -Miikka

    ReplyDelete
  7. Maybe this page can help regarding details of CotW's development (version) timeline - see e.g. the version history with dates and downloads at the bottom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Based on all those dates, I'm going to change the date to 1992. There are versions in the middle of that year being offered by Epic MegaGames (previous ones had just been circulated to Microsoft employees). And since those versions promise Part 2 without suggesting there's going to be any kind of delay, I guess I have to list Part 2 as a 1992 game, too.

      Delete
    2. Hadn't checked those downloads myself (no Windows installed), but here on the Internet Archive is a version (1.1) whose files have timestamps from September (and July) 1992 in line with the dates on the site linked above.

      One of these 1992 files is "Changes.doc", listing modifications between v1.0 and v1.1 and the introductory text says (highlighting by me):
      "This file is a quick summary of the changes from 1.0 to 1.1,
      and of some of the new features that have been added. Some
      of the text below only applies to game two
      ". And one of the mentioned changes is "Some of the special monsters, such as Hrungnir in game
      one, and the giant kings in game two, are now immune to sleep and polymorph". To me, this indicates that part two was indeed ready to be sold at the same time, in 1992.

      My guess is the 1994 date (at least on mobygames) for part two stems from the copyrights shown on the mobygames scans of the back of the box and of the disc here. However, this could just be a later release as there is also a box & disc for part one with the same copyright date - see e.g. the pictures of the respective boxes and discs for both parts in this ebay sale or this picture of the back of the box for the first part in another sale.

      Delete
  8. Yeah, the box art is taking the cake, with the golden origami pterodactyls guarding the ziggurat of molten magma.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Interesting that they went with skiing difficulty icons in the menu but didn't go with a double black diamond for "experts only" https://snowslang.com/ski-trail-ratings/

    ReplyDelete
  10. Not being overly familiar with details and names of Norse mythology beyond the most popular ones, I still thought 'Lifthransir' rang a bell. Turns out I was thinking of the (console) game Odin Sphere: Leifthrasir, an enhanced HD remake of Odin Sphere.

    I assume in spite of the slight spelling differences both refer to 'Lífþrasir/Lifthrasir'. Maybe we'll learn more when you get to part two.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Argh. So I played this plenty back in the day and spun up a vm to play through it again over the weekend when I saw it coming up.
    And in all that time I never thought to check the help system to see the weapon/armour stats. /sigh.
    Cranking up the difficulty in this one certainly makes those early levels a challenge, despite a lot of familiarity I still died regularly to new monsters. I might need to try again with magic missile instead of heal.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It's funny how this game seems to have invented the Diablo II structure - moving from one hub+dungeon area to another without having an actual overworld - years before Diablo I. Can't think of an earlier example of this formula (although I'm not exactly an expert in roguelikes).

    ReplyDelete

I welcome all comments about the material in this blog, and I generally do not censor them. However, please follow these rules:

1. DO NOT COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY. If you do not want to log in or cannot log in with a Google Account, choose the "Name/URL" option and type a name (you can leave the URL blank). If that doesn't work, use the "Anonymous" option but put your name of choice at the top of the entry.

2. Do not link to any commercial entities, including Kickstarter campaigns, unless they're directly relevant to the material in the associated blog posting. (For instance, that GOG is selling the particular game I'm playing is relevant; that Steam is having a sale this week on other games is not.) This also includes user names that link to advertising.

3. Please avoid profanity and vulgar language. I don't want my blog flagged by too many filters. I will delete comments containing profanity on a case-by-case basis.

4. I appreciate if you use ROT13 for explicit spoilers for the current game and upcoming games. Please at least mention "ROT13" in the comment so we don't get a lot of replies saying "what is that gibberish?"

5. Comments on my blog are not a place for slurs against any race, sex, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or mental or physical disability. I will delete these on a case-by-case basis depending on my interpretation of what constitutes a "slur."

Blogger has a way of "eating" comments, so I highly recommend that you copy your words to the clipboard before submitting, just in case.

I read all comments, no matter how old the entry. So do many of my subscribers. Reader comments on "old" games continue to supplement our understanding of them. As such, all comment threads on this blog are live and active unless I specifically turn them off. There is no such thing as "necro-posting" on this blog, and thus no need to use that term.

I will delete any comments that simply point out typos. If you want to use the commenting system to alert me to them, great, I appreciate it, but there's no reason to leave such comments preserved for posterity.

I'm sorry for any difficulty commenting. I turn moderation on and off and "word verification" on and off frequently depending on the volume of spam I'm receiving. I only use either when spam gets out of control, so I appreciate your patience with both moderation tools.