Sword Coast Legends

Sword Coast Legends

View Stats:
neuronfly Jul 1, 2019 @ 12:37am
How to buy this game?
Where to buy this game?
< >
Showing 1-15 of 30 comments
Elroy Hunt Jul 1, 2019 @ 7:54am 
Online Steam Key Resellers.
Last edited by Elroy Hunt; Jul 1, 2019 @ 7:55am
neuronfly Jul 1, 2019 @ 9:20am 
Originally posted by Elroy Hunt:
Online Steam Key Resellers.
Second hand copy?
Damn_Monkey Jul 2, 2019 @ 12:16am 
The game can no longer be sold, so the only way to get it, is to get a key from someone who had it before they stopped being able to legal sell it.

But don't waste your time/effort/money on it. Very buggy. Poor writing. Bad combat mechanics.
ACTIONBOMBA Jul 11, 2019 @ 1:56pm 
this game is awesome - it was and still is!
like all things in life, everybody has his opinion on things.
so get ur key and experience that great game on your own.
Damn_Monkey Jul 11, 2019 @ 10:39pm 
While you're allowed to have an opinion, some things are just objectively bad.

At a surface level, single play through with out reading too deep into it, this game isn't all that bad. It had some potential. But there are things that are just wrong with the rules and mechanics and the choices that the Dev's made that took it very far from a D&D adventure.

It is a bad game. The proof is in the pudding. It failed and is no longer available for purchase. Good games don't do that. They make a profit and the company that made them get to go on and make more games. Great games don't bankrupt gaming companies.
Demolaye Jul 12, 2019 @ 10:01am 
Originally posted by Damn_Monkey:
While you're allowed to have an opinion, some things are just objectively bad.

At a surface level, single play through with out reading too deep into it, this game isn't all that bad. It had some potential. But there are things that are just wrong with the rules and mechanics and the choices that the Dev's made that took it very far from a D&D adventure.

It is a bad game. The proof is in the pudding. It failed and is no longer available for purchase. Good games don't do that. They make a profit and the company that made them get to go on and make more games. Great games don't bankrupt gaming companies.

To start out by saying that "your allowed to have and opinion" then denigrate the person for stating an opinion contrary to yours seems a little hypocritical. It's the same as saying you're allowed to have an opinion but they don't really matter as you're not as good/smart/experienced as me.
If you would like to rate the game as bad – feel free - go ahead - but the argument should be based on the game elements; as the overall success of the company that developed/published it irrelevant to the conversation.

Why would a statement like "It failed and is no longer available for purchase. Good games don't do that. They make a profit and the company that made them get to go on and make more games. Great games don't bankrupt gaming companies" be a specious argument?

Let me demonstrate.
Black Isle Studios: Went bankrupt after it developed/published a string of classics.
Developed:
1. Fallout 1 (1997),
2. Fallout 2 (1998),
3. Planescape: Torment (1999),
4. Icewind Dale (2000),
5. Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter (2001)
6. Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter - Trials of the Luremaster (2001),
7. Icewind Dale II (2002), and
8. Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance II (2004).
- - Pretty much an all Hall of Fame line-up there.

Published:
1. Baldur's Gate (1998),
2. Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast (1999),
3. Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn (2000),
4. Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal (2001), and
5. Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader (2003).
- - 5 out 6 games here HOF candidates.

So, where did they go wrong? Where were they spending money when they died?
The games it had in development when they went under were:
1. Van Buren, AKA "Fallout 3" (cancelled 2003), fire-saled the rights to Bethesda to keep company afloat,
2. Baldur's Gate III: The Black Hound (cancelled 2003), one of the most highly anticipated RPGs ever,
3. Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance III (cancelled 2004).
Still good games.
So again, where did they go wrong?

With 12 /13 games developed/published being critical darlings and 10 or so of them being sales successes, how did they fail?
IMO, ratio of production cost to profit margin. (Good) RPGs were and still are more expensive to produce on a sales ratio basis.
So here one of the most critically beloved companies that produced some of the most beloved games of all times still went under. - So yes, a company that only developed "good games" and hit home runs nearly every at bat still went under.

Not posting this as an attack, I just don’t agree with the logic you used. Feel free to post reasons why the like or don’t the game.

Speaking of the game here is how I looked at it:
Not really a comprehensive review as I have so far only completed the Single Player campaign and a few dungeons, and I have not yet used it's most touted modes i.e. multi-player and Dungeon Master features.
Some have argued "but it's not a D&D game" and then gave it a negative review based (and many people, solely or mainly) on that . I believe this is a misconception, as it depends on either your insertion point into the D&D universe or the breadth of your experience and association with its’ many rule editions over the years. As well I would tend towards judging it on whether it is a good game / good RPG rather than solely on its’ D&D-ness as that is, as stated, a more subjective point than general game tastes.
If your a gamer whose main experience is say the Baldur's Gate (or EE) / Icewind Dale (or EE) series, or your an old-timer who's experiences are from the eras of Edition-1, e2, or e2.5 gameplay in either Pen+Paper or CRPG forms you may be one of those who argue, "it's not a D&D game".
However, if you have as well played the Neverwinter Nights series (e3 rules), NwN 2 (e3.5 rules), Temple of Elemental Evil (e3.5 rules), [another game with LGBT NPCs for those "Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear" expansion] haters, Dungeons & Dragons Online (e-3.5 rules), or the Neverwinter MMO (e4 rules), you will be more familiar with the play style, character creation and tactics.
SCL uses an adaption of the new e-5 rules for character creation which IMO can best be described as a return to e-1 simplicity, with e3.5 flexibility, but squarely in the D20 era.
Game play is influenced by conventions used in MMOs and newer CRPGs with cool-down timers on powers instead of powers restricted by per day or per encounter maximums. Some love, some hate, I think it's OK and I am one of those nerds who have played 1,000's of hours of older games restricted by the e1, e2 rules.
I do see the fun in having to be really strategic in how I will plan my day's tactics, but I MORE enjoy losing this ARTIFICE of doing so much prep before a key encounter which basically tells the gamer you need to know the content of difficult encounters to win at them, which essentially tells you to game-the-game rather than play-the-game.
IMO, the new system is much more about building characters you like and being able to hook up with players who might be hardcore or casual and everyone can still contribute and enjoy their time in game.
I have so far as well enjoyed the writing and voice acting, it's not quite Minsc in BG/BG2 series but it's pretty good (do a YouTube search for Minsc).
Graphics and character models are pretty good, and the engine runs fairly smooth, I don't however understand the lengthy load times for transitioning between areas (server based?).

Game play has been fun and easy to pick up, the character builds are understandable but have also have good depth so if you’re like me and love tweaking build after build there are lots of variations to play with. One can choose feats and skills from several areas that apply to your profession if you want to make your rogue very "thief-like" or very "assassin-y" you can pick and choose feats skills from these or many other profession specific areas, as well as a few common to all areas which can make your 'toon utilitarian or a specialist.

Have more to say on the game but didn't mean to be writing a full review.
Last edited by Demolaye; Jul 16, 2019 @ 9:01am
tathen Jul 16, 2019 @ 12:40am 
main problem with the game was everyone was expecting a 5e D&D NWN type game/a good multiplayer DM creation system

instead we got a D&D themed game(based on faerun world), the game was not 5E or 3E

if u think of it as a game set in the D&D faerun world but not D&D itself its a okish game
Demolaye Jul 16, 2019 @ 8:56am 
Originally posted by tathen:
main problem with the game was everyone was expecting a 5e D&D NWN type game/a good multiplayer DM creation system

instead we got a D&D themed game(based on faerun world), the game was not 5E or 3E

if u think of it as a game set in the D&D faerun world but not D&D itself its a okish game

True.
Game was D&D generic, very much in the 3.5e /4e era but as I said earlier concessions made to the MMO style of using powers - - similar to D&D O.
However neither of these points make it a bad game.
Expectations (rather than results) kill a lot of games, in this case many people were expecting a literal translation of 5e, which was never promised, however it was expected.
The game itself was actually pretty good, the story a little too straight forward samey-same, but I enjoyed the character creation / development quite a bit.
Damn_Monkey Jul 17, 2019 @ 1:49am 
Originally posted by Demolaye:
However neither of these points make it a bad game.

I'd argue that it does. We were sold one thing, but got another. I spent money to play an authentic tabletop D&D experience, and never got that. That does make it a bad game.

If I ordered a Porterhouse with some crumbled blue cheese, and was given a McDonald's "beef" patty that had been sitting under a warmer for the last two hours, one might say that I got a bad meal. Would it still be edible? sure. Are there a select few who might actually prefer that? fine. But that doesn't make it good.

Beyond the whole "It's only D&D on the surface" issue, there are much deeper problems at play. First and foremost, as an RPG, there is very little in the way of any kind of role play. The game will play out exactly the same way every time regardless of what class or race you pick. There are no real choices to be made that will have any affect what so ever on the end result of the game. That's bad game design.

All game decision rolls are made based on the stats of the PC. I'm in a room with a sleeping guy and I need to pick his pocket. I'm a Warrior with lots of STR. Standing next to me is a thief who is perfect for this job. Yet I'm not able to have him attempt to steal it. Or I'm trying to mix some potions but I'm too dumb to read the instructions so I goof it up. Why doesn't my max Int Wizard who is watching me speak up? Because it's bad game design.

A little over half way through the game I started to notice that my auto attacks were doing more damage than my abilities and spells. Soon realized that beyond the few buff spells I could cast, doing anything other than auto attack was going to lower my dps. Once again, bad game design.

I had a bit of fun the first time through. But I was also hugely disappointed by the time I killed the end boss. So much so I never went back to play the RoD bonus content they released.
neuronfly Jul 17, 2019 @ 3:12am 
Originally posted by Damn_Monkey:
Originally posted by Demolaye:
However neither of these points make it a bad game.

I'd argue that it does. We were sold one thing, but got another. I spent money to play an authentic tabletop D&D experience, and never got that. That does make it a bad game.

If I ordered a Porterhouse with some crumbled blue cheese, and was given a McDonald's "beef" patty that had been sitting under a warmer for the last two hours, one might say that I got a bad meal. Would it still be edible? sure. Are there a select few who might actually prefer that? fine. But that doesn't make it good.

Beyond the whole "It's only D&D on the surface" issue, there are much deeper problems at play. First and foremost, as an RPG, there is very little in the way of any kind of role play. The game will play out exactly the same way every time regardless of what class or race you pick. There are no real choices to be made that will have any affect what so ever on the end result of the game. That's bad game design.

All game decision rolls are made based on the stats of the PC. I'm in a room with a sleeping guy and I need to pick his pocket. I'm a Warrior with lots of STR. Standing next to me is a thief who is perfect for this job. Yet I'm not able to have him attempt to steal it. Or I'm trying to mix some potions but I'm too dumb to read the instructions so I goof it up. Why doesn't my max Int Wizard who is watching me speak up? Because it's bad game design.

A little over half way through the game I started to notice that my auto attacks were doing more damage than my abilities and spells. Soon realized that beyond the few buff spells I could cast, doing anything other than auto attack was going to lower my dps. Once again, bad game design.

I had a bit of fun the first time through. But I was also hugely disappointed by the time I killed the end boss. So much so I never went back to play the RoD bonus content they released.
WTF? The thief companion don't help with pickpocket and the wizard companion don't help with mixing potions? And autoattacks doing more DPS than spells and abilities? Yikes. I will be staying far away from this game then. Now I understand why this game is not available on steam, gog or anywhere. Thanks for the warning and saving my money.
Last edited by neuronfly; Jul 17, 2019 @ 9:54am
Demolaye Jul 17, 2019 @ 9:27am 
@Damn_Monkey,

Not withstanding the "I wanted this and got that" argument which is hard to argue as no two persons expectations of anything are the same; you've made that point in this thread several times and on many other SCL threads more times again. Acknowledged. You didn't get what you wanted, point acknowledged, now let's move on.

I'm not surprised to see that you dropped the "the game is bad and my proof is that the Devs who made made it went bankrupt" argument as that was quite a non sequitur. I can if you wish layout the financial failure of a few other beloved companies who made critically and fan accepted games - then still went bankrupt.

Glad to see you actually moving onto in game points to make your argument; as actually discussing in-game mechanics and game-play is much more conducive to the topic at hand. I must say your in-game experience sounds a little different than mine. To me all the character builds do play differently and I enjoyed theory crafting several PCs just to run them around see how they would play. For me I never experienced what you mentioned. I normally balanced my party and used a Rogue or someone I had specifically built up in the rogue-ish skills to do thief-y things like pick locks and disarm traps etc.

Maybe I will boot the game up and purposely unbalance or under-man my party in specific situations to see if what you have said is true. But for me in 60'ish hours spread over the two commercial campaigns I didn't experience that. I mostly saw tactical results based on my character build, and or party composition, which are two things I and many other RPG players like to see. Your play experience sounds different than mine - I don't know why - I wasn't there.

I'll restate I entered in this conversation on a point of logic, I'm not here to bash you or be a fan-boi for the game (as I said only 60'ish hours in SCL, while 1,000's of hours in various other D&D based games and MMOs). I liked SCL, you didn't , NO BIG DEAL.
Last edited by Demolaye; Jul 18, 2019 @ 1:14am
medion_no Jul 17, 2019 @ 8:19pm 
Originally posted by Damn_Monkey:
The game can no longer be sold, so the only way to get it, is to get a key from someone who had it before they stopped being able to legal sell it.

But don't waste your time/effort/money on it. Very buggy. Poor writing. Bad combat mechanics.

I like the game. Is not perfect in any way but if you already completed Baldur`s Gate and Icewind...
If OP is still looking for a copy of this game. I got my on G.2.A (remove the periods). They still have a few keys. At the moment, you can get one for $7 - $9. Not exactly the most trustworthy site though. Make sure you read everything before purchasing.
Damn_Monkey Jul 23, 2019 @ 1:07am 
Originally posted by Demolaye:
@Damn_Monkey,

Not withstanding the "I wanted this and got that" argument which is hard to argue as no two persons expectations of anything are the same; you've made that point in this thread several times and on many other SCL threads more times again. Acknowledged. You didn't get what you wanted, point acknowledged, now let's move on.

It's not that I didn't get what I wanted. I didn't get what I was offered, and then paid for. And it wasn't just me. It was the vast majority of customers who bought the game.

People ask why it failed. And that is the number one reason. It wasn't what was promised. You can argue all you want about how you enjoyed it. Cool beans. You have low expectations. Nothing wrong with that.

And I never said that the only variable in a company staying alive was their ability to make a great game. Only an idiot would infer that. But if a company only makes bad games, then they can't stay viable for long. You can post all the numbers you like. I'll skip over them next time I come back here because they have nothing to do with what I said.

Rule number one. Make the customer happy. They failed spectacularly in that regard.
neuronfly Jul 23, 2019 @ 3:22am 
Originally posted by Damn_Monkey:
Originally posted by Demolaye:
@Damn_Monkey,

Not withstanding the "I wanted this and got that" argument which is hard to argue as no two persons expectations of anything are the same; you've made that point in this thread several times and on many other SCL threads more times again. Acknowledged. You didn't get what you wanted, point acknowledged, now let's move on.

It's not that I didn't get what I wanted. I didn't get what I was offered, and then paid for. And it wasn't just me. It was the vast majority of customers who bought the game.

People ask why it failed. And that is the number one reason. It wasn't what was promised. You can argue all you want about how you enjoyed it. Cool beans. You have low expectations. Nothing wrong with that.

And I never said that the only variable in a company staying alive was their ability to make a great game. Only an idiot would infer that. But if a company only makes bad games, then they can't stay viable for long. You can post all the numbers you like. I'll skip over them next time I come back here because they have nothing to do with what I said.

Rule number one. Make the customer happy. They failed spectacularly in that regard.
That is why most gaming companies make only mobile games nowadays because in mobile there are no good games... only sh.itty games with horrible microtransactions and they don't take any effort to make. Perfect for lazy developers and sh.itty companies.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 30 comments
Per page: 15 30 50