King Arthur: Knight's Tale - Review @ Wccftech

Wccftech reviewed King Arthur: Knight's Tale:

King Arthur: Knight's Tale Review - Make Way for the New SRPG King

Here's a fun fact. I didn't know much about the Arthurian tales until my interest got piqued by Sonic and the Black Knight. I know, it's a dumb way to find out about King Arthur's adventures. I bring this up because this very interest came back as soon as I read about King Arthur: Knight's Tale.

My expectations were already way too high when the game came close to the release date. But then I started to see some things that made me feel mixed before jumping in. For one, this is a Kickstarter-backed project. While not every game like this is bad on its own, they also tend to be middling experiences barring a few exceptions like Shovel Knight and Bloodstained, of course.

[...]

Despite a few shortcomings, King Arthur: Knight's Tale is one of the best strategy RPGs I've played. While the SRPG aspects are pretty great, this alternate take on the Arthurian Tale can keep you engaged with its characters and stories.

Pros

• Great voice-acted cutscenes with excellent characterization
• Tight Strategy RPG elements that make every decision count
• Balanced difficulty options that allow for players to tailor their experience to their skill level

Cons

• Some performance and graphical issues
• Minor sound design problems that have certain sound effects being louder than they should be

Score: 9/10

Click to expand...

Thanks Henriquejr!

More information.

It was completely out of my radar until this last weekend when I found out about it and immediatly wanted to try it. Let's say that I've put serious hours into it and I'm enjoing it very much. What a nice surprise!

As my will to keep playing Elden Ring has fizzled out (after almost 80 hours) before finishing it, I'm finding it difficult to gather the will to go back to Elex II, which I only started to play before Elden Ring because I was having issues with it (ER) with heavy stuttering and crashes. After finding a trick not to load the anti-cheat software, that was bugging everything, no matter if was playing in offline mode, I left Elex II immediatly to play ER.

Encased and Elex II are the two games that I'm yet to give my full attention, due to bad timing of their launches. And as I don't see anyting that entincing coming out before Starfield later this year, i thought I would have to gather the will to restart playing one of those two games, but King Arthur: Knight's Tale arrived, surprised me about how satisfying it is and will be staying for a while.

After that, I'll see about Encased. Elex II didn't entice my like the first game. I guess I was not in the mood for miriads of subquests with subsubquests.

Looking good! I didn't know there were performance issues, I'll wait until they fix that and the download size. IIRC they made their own engine, which is a strange choice.

Surely the author meant Tactical RPG and not Strategy (strategic) RPG? I'm not even sure such a game exists. Perhaps Crusader Kings could be said to be a strategic RPG? Though it rather looks like a grand strategy game with RPG elements. Or Expeditions: Rome could be said to be an RPG with strategy elements, by stretching it.

Even tactical RPG seems to be a bit of a misnomer since it could be said of any RPG with combat. What people usually mean by that is just turn-based combat RPG. For example I find NWN to be as tactical as Solasta.

I think tactical rpgs are usually games with turn based combat but where the focus is on the combat. For example Blackguards or this game.

NWN is more of a traditional RPG and has rtwp combat too.

Strategy RPGs I would expect to have an element of overall strategy to it whilst controlling a specific character or group thereof so closest I can think of right now would be Expeditions Rome, because it has the overall strategy layer to it too but I've not played it.

I've been playing this game a little bit since its release. The combat is pretty solid and challenging, and the systems are interesting, if not necessarily amazing, or perfectly tuned. It all works in general terms and makes for an interesting game. The story is a peculiar twist on the Knights of the Round Table fables. Again, nothing breathtaking, but it works in keeping the game together.

My greatest gripe is locked in cookie-cut-male-edgelord-with-raspy-voice-protagonist with the "I'm the best shit since bread came sliced" attitude, but if one is able to get over it, there's a good game behind it. It does kind of ruin the game's story for me, but the combat is proving to be fun enough to keep playing for now.

And yes, I would compare this game in several ways to Blackguards, as a tactical combat RPG. Strategy RPG I'd think something like the Warhammer: Total War games, but that's not how this game plays out. It does have a building/upgrading element that's more akin to roguelike games (ie, Darkest Dungeon) than strategy games.

I also just saw that there was a small patch, so it may have addressed some of the performance issues that some people are having, but I can't say I was having any beyond some minor stuttering that I always expect in these lowish budget games.

Nereida said:

I've been playing this game a little bit since its release. The combat is pretty solid and challenging, and the systems are interesting, if not necessarily amazing, or perfectly tuned. It all works in general terms and makes for an interesting game. The story is a peculiar twist on the Knights of the Round Table fables. Again, nothing breathtaking, but it works in keeping the game together.

As usual, my gripe is locked in cookie-cut- male-edgelord-with-raspy-voice-protagonist, but if one is able to get over it, there's a good game behind it.

And yes, I would compare this game in several ways to Blackguards, as a tactical combat RPG. Strategy RPG I'd think something like the Total War games, but that's not how this game plays out. It does have a building/upgrading element that's more akin to roguelike games than strategy games.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the impression.

Oddly enough it makes me less interested in the game, because I find the Blackguards style too combat heavy. I like having other things to do in between battles usually.

What's that like? Or do you just jump from battle to battle?

Pladio said:

Thanks for the impression.

Oddly enough it makes me less interested in the game, because I find the Blackguards style too combat heavy. I like having other things to do in between battles usually.

What's that like? Or do you just jump from battle to battle?

Click to expand...

It's similar but honestly more in spirit than in how it actually plays. It just feels similar, probably because of being a turn-based combat RPG with a dark, gritty atmosphere that oozes decay and having the full-blown choice of being an evil tyrant. To be more descriptive, in this game, you explore instanced mini-dungeons presented as "missions", and get some tidbits of world lore or story development as you run from battle to battle. You get to make some choices to develop your morality between Christian / Old Faith and Champion / Tyrant, each with rewards attached when reaching certain milestones. After each mission is completed, you gather a reward and usually, new missions show up for you to tackle.

This game has some roguelike elements as I mentioned as you improve Castle Camelot and all its facilities that allow you to improve gear, get better and cheaper consumables, heal injuries more efficiently and such.

Injuries play a pivotal role in this game, as it has an elaborate health/injury system that leads you into playing not only to win battles but to do it by sustaining as little damage as possible. Injured heroes will carry on permanent penalties until treated, and it usually takes several missions "out" to heal them, with significant gold costs attached if you wish to speed the process up. Deaths are final for all heroes, and if the main hero dies, the game is over.

By default the game lets you keep as many saves as you want, but there is the typical game mode that only keeps one save as you progress so there's no save-scumming and rewinding.

Another thing to note, Blackguards combat was hexagonal (the superior grid type, just too complex for most studies to defer to it I guess ) and King Arthur's is the usual squares.

Nereida said:

It's similar but honestly more in spirit than in how it actually plays. It just feels similar, probably because of being a turn-based combat RPG with a dark, gritty atmosphere that oozes decay and having the full-blown choice of being an evil tyrant. To be more descriptive, in this game, you explore instanced mini-dungeons presented as "missions", and get some tidbits of world lore or story development as you run from battle to battle. You get to make some choices to develop your morality between Christian / Old Faith and Champion / Tyrant, each with rewards attached when reaching certain milestones. After each mission is completed, you gather a reward and usually, new missions show up for you to tackle.

This game has some roguelike elements as I mentioned as you improve Castle Camelot and all its facilities that allow you to improve gear, get better and cheaper consumables, heal injuries more efficiently and such.

Injuries play a pivotal role in this game, as it has an elaborate health/injury system that leads you into playing not only to win battles but to do it by sustaining as little damage as possible. Injured heroes will carry on permanent penalties until treated, and it usually takes several missions "out" to heal them, with significant gold costs attached if you wish to speed the process up. Deaths are final for all heroes, and if the main hero dies, the game is over.

By default the game lets you keep as many saves as you want, but there is the typical game mode that only keeps one save as you progress so there's no save-scumming and rewinding.

Another thing to note, Blackguards combat was hexagonal (the superior grid type, just too complex for most studies to defer to it I guess ) and King Arthur's is the usual squares.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I will keep this on wishlist for when it gets a bit of a discount then.

Pladio said:

I think tactical rpgs are usually games with turn based combat but where the focus is on the combat. For example Blackguards or this game.

NWN is more of a traditional RPG and has rtwp combat too.

Strategy RPGs I would expect to have an element of overall strategy to it whilst controlling a specific character or group thereof so closest I can think of right now would be Expeditions Rome, because it has the overall strategy layer to it too but I've not played it.

Click to expand...

The "focus on combat" seems to match games called TRPG, you're right. And turn-based, because RTwP would rather be "messy tactical RPG" - at least the way I play it

I have the impression TRPG defines the main focus of King Arthur: Knight's Tale better than SRPG but I haven't played the game.

Good reviews and watcher impressions make me want to play the game. Only thing stopping me is the developers games eat a chunk of your hard-drive with install sizes.

I don't know if they suck with compression or it's their game engine.

It's good to read such reviews, as I'm really on the fence for this one, being a huge fan of the genre yet disappointed so many times in the past.

I consider tactical games to be games heavily focused on combat tactics. RPG's that have combat that can be tactical don't really come across as a tactical game to me as that isn't the dominating factor.

KA:KT is heavily combat focused, and TB, so I would label it myself as a TRPG (tactical RPG).

Most folks who know me here know I am not big on combat but I still enjoy the game. Neredia did a nice job of outlining the basics, and have to agree with the male edgelord comment which is dead on although not an issue for me, so won't go over that again.

My enjoyment of the game is less obvious as its more that I always wanted to be able to take the King Arthur story and keep the pagan old ways strong and powerful instead of being swept away by Christianity. So being able to do that is a huge plus for me in the game. I also like the whole King Arthur fantasy lore in general. The only thing that I tend to dislike about KA mythology was the Christian aspect so again its a win-win being able to play Mordred and keep the pagan side strong.

I also enjoy getting to know the little bits of lore in the story, I like most of the characters, even the ones I "don't like" for their role (my two favorites are the very religious ones which means they get mad at me for always going pagan), I want to learn more about the story and see the ending, and I enjoy some of the combat. Combat challenge I found a little uneven at times myself but not being great at combat might be more noticeable to me.

Building up the castle is fun and I like the various choices you have to make that seem to have some impact on the game as you go, even if only who you can take with you on missions and certain outcomes.

Atmosphere is cool if you like that dark fantasy style, or even if you don't but want a change which is where I am at. I am not into horror or overly dark settings myself BUT it is nice to have contrast and a change of style now and then which is why I think I am enjoying the atmosphere a lot - very different from what I often play.

Game does look interesting and tempting despite my hunch that it's probably overly hyped, most likely tactically simplistic and repetitive, packs considerably less punch than other similar titles in its price range, and the devs can't even put together a professionally packaged installer after all these years (previous game is an ARPG with a 90G install size that's probably 4x bigger than necessary).

To compare, Chaos Gate is about to drop for the ~same cost, looks about the same or better for graphical beefiness, (looks generally badass but that's just me), and - install size of 18G, which is more like what professionals produce. First time game for this crew so, again, wtf is up with NeoCore.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1611910/Warhammer_40000_Chaos_Gate__Daemonhunters/

Install size things bothers me a lot since to me as a dev this is dev 101 stuff (barely a "dev thing" even, techie 101 maybe) that simply should not be happening.

Anyways. Space and money aren't so much factors. It's a matter of principle(s). I can stand to wait for a sale or see if these guys can pull off a less ridiculous install size this week.

The good words here have put this game on my radar. 100+ GB is a big issue for me as I have to pay per GB for downloads in my area, but on the Steam forum the developers indicated that they are working on the issue.

Couchpotato said:

Good reviews and watcher impressions make me want to play the game. Only thing stopping me is the developers games eat a chunk of your hard-drive with install sizes.

I don't know if they suck with compression or it's their game engine.

Click to expand...

I think it may be time for you to upgrade that 40gb hard drive

rune_74 said:

I think it may be time for you to upgrade that 40gb hard drive

Click to expand...

I suppose the three other members who said the same thing must as well.:lol:

You know what they say about assuming.

So...

DLCs are coming but let's just keep their content a secret for now

Click to expand...

screencap from Neocore's official discord server, from a dev' :

Hmm, interesting if you get to play another side. Course they are not saying what the content is. I wouldn't have any interest in playing Arthur though so if that is the DLC would skip.

But then I seldom play DLC unless it adds something to the base game like a new class, new companion, new race, etc.,.

Having played a bit more, one thing I have noticed increasingly is the combat balance is out of whack.

Some missions will completely tear your party to shreds as you barely manage to crawl through the finish line and need to spend your whole treasury and weeks in the infirmary for your heroes to fully recover, and others that are equal or even higher level are trivial walks in the park that don't even dent your armour. Part of it is that you are able to stack up crucial bonuses from gear that make your units very good at the one thing they need to be (tanks become really good at absorbing hits, damage dealers get really good at oneshotting enemies and gaining snowball effect abilities that turn them into juggernauts, etc), but also in general there seems to be missmatch between the dungeon intended level and how difficult it is to complete.

Other than that, which might or might not be aproblem later in the game, all else I said before stands. It's a good game in general, and for turn-based RPG lovers I'll say it's worth playing.

I completely agree with the oddish balance... rythme, let's say. I feel that I'm almost breezing through 3, 4 missions, and then get mauled in the next. Also, generally speaking I find the Normal difficulty mode really too easy, while the Difficult one to ramp up things drastically, too much.

In any case, this might be of interest, again from the dev (last announcement)

many of you shared your feedback about various missions, Heroes, difficulty levels from a balance perspective. Some of these thoughts have been shared among many players (like the Morgana Le Fay mission with the Demonic possessed villagers) but the rest of the feedback is quite scattered and not confirmed by others, hence we cannot determine whether further improvements should be done. Hence, we decided to create a new channel balance-suggestions where you can share your feedback. We assess these and look into the problematic parts.

Click to expand...