 It’s been a month since the GF! editors presented me with
Interplay’s “Soulbringer” to review. There was nothing to go on at that
time, no advance hype, no expectation for innovation, nothing. Sometimes, the titles that
come to us under such cryptic circumstances are the ones that surprise us the most. Okay,
I’m bluffing. That’s never really been the case in the pc gaming business. We
generally know what’s supposed to be hot and what’s not long before most games
hit the shops. But I’m grabbing for straws here, any straw, that will offer some
handle on this game. Time’s running out, though, and before another sucker blows
hard-earned sheckels on this dog, I’ve got to speak true. “Soulbringer” could just as easily have been
called “Stinker.” Either way, you’re left with a really cruddy title for a
game. At least the revised moniker says something substantive about the game.
 First of all, system specifications on the box claim that
players need 500 Mb free to play the game. By the time I’d loaded the works though,
my machine had dropped 710 Mb to run the full version of the game. Still, I was
optimistic; excellent graphics and sound have redeemed many a title. So I didn’t mind
the massive, time-consuming load. It got me to thinking that, maybe, this game would be
better than I expected. After all, I still didn’t know anything about it, and the
supporting materials—the box, the manual, and the cd jewel case—didn’t
reveal much about the game’s story or graphics.
“If it takes this much space,” I naively reasoned, “then it’s
GOT to be cool!” But I’m a seasoned cynic now.
 When I booted up a new game the graphics were crude and jarring.
The menu-based interfaces were pretty enough and recalled what passed for sophisticated
html graphics three or four years ago. Still, they were only menus. The main gaming
graphics, on the other hand, were grainy and pixilated. Characters looked spindly and the
action was wooden. A caption on the “Soulbringer” package boasts that the game
features “A customizable and very realistic combat system that can be as simple or
complex as you like.” Well, I like things simple, especially when there are games to
play, and the combat system of this game is so complicated that it could pass for
kabbalah. In addition, the camera control was awkward (players use the left and right
mouse buttons to manipulate the look of the game) but seemed pretty smooth once I got the
hang of it. The voice acting was okay, but at times it seemed as stilted as the animation.
 The box also asserts “Soulbringer” offers “One of
the most involving and epic scenarios ever written for an rpg adventure.” I intend to
close with this idea because it suggests some redemption for this game. See, it’s
pretty clear that whoever developed this game had a lot at stake; there’s nothing new
to the story, but it does enthusiastically evoke Tolkien and the best of the AD&D
mythologies. The writers and designers clearly loved the “Soulbringer” saga and
wanted the rest of us gaming freaks to love it, too. But even the best, most enduring
stories sound flat and tired if the storyteller sucks. Loading the game with
less-demanding specs doesn’t improve things, either, because then players have to
sacrifice sound for an improved graphics quality that doesn’t carry over to the
quality of the animation.
Maybe the best way to think about
“Soulbringer” is as a game worthy of some appreciation for the enthusiasm that
went into its design and marketing. Then again, maybe it’s okay to state that “Soulbringer”
sucks more than memory. It just sucks. End of story.
--Greg Matthews |
