Talk:Puzzle Quest: Challenge of the Warlords

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Puzzle Quest: Challenge of the Warlords article.
Article policies
Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

Contents

[edit] Mac version out now

Being distributed by GameTree, who I hear are a spinoff from Transgaming. - http://www.gametreeonline.com/product.php?productid=16147 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.55.181 (talk) 03:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Puzzle Pirates

What relevance does the Puzzle Pirates link have with this game? 128.196.208.1 (talk) 17:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Update request

This pages needs an gigantic update. The game is out now, and its great Captain duck 17:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nintendo Power review

Anyone know what is going on with Nintendo Power's 4/10 rating for the DS version of this game? It is seriously slandering the game's otherwise good name and bringing down it's average rating at gamerankings. http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/934598.asp?q=puzzle%20quest JyL 17:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo Power believes in writing reviews based not on the opinions of the reviewer, nor on objective logic concerning the game but rather their prediction for the game's sales. The interesting thing is that by writing a review score so low, they partially fulfill their own prophecy. Most gamers are upset by the NP's failure to review a game properly due to this latest mistake. BlackVegetable 00:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

If I had only played the game for 5 minutes, I probably would have given it a low score too. The game doesn't look very polished (awkward dialogue, boring sprites, no graphical flair), there are some moderately serious UI issues (not giving you all the info on spells from the selection menu; how am I supposed to make a good choice if I don't know how much mana I need to cast it?), and the controls make it very easy to shoot yourself in the foot (accidentally touching the wrong thing will give you damage and skip your turn). On top of that, it's essentially just an extension of a puzzle game that's been around for years and already has several iterations on the DS.

Now, I *have* played it for more than 5 minutes so I know that the magic and skill mechanics are enough to distinguish it from other Bejeweled clones. Still, I think the above flaws are serious enough that the current reviews are a bit high. On the other hand, NP's review is far too low, I think it deserves something around 6 or 7 out of 10; a 4 is the equivalent of saying "this game is total crap." 63.102.70.70 19:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GREAT GAME!

I had been following this game since its announcement, many months prior. Most sites descibed the game EXACTLY as the game was when released. I have about 15 games formy DS,all of which have not seen the inside of the DS,since the release of Puuzzle Quest Warlords.

I only hope there will be sequels and similar creative successes. It's important to realize this is coming from someone who liked zuma, but was not enchanted with gameslike Bejeweled. Not that those are bad game types, just not for me.

The fact that this game (Puzzle Quest Warlords) contains this jewel-type gaming,one should not make the mistake of thinkiong that's what this game is only about. In fact, there is an equal amount of RPG detail as there is jewel-swapping or what I refer to as grid-action. BESIDES the NP review,which the others spoke of, I casually defy anyone to type the name into any browser and NOT COME UP WITH A POSITIVE REVEIW for this game.

It is being supported by game reviewers that are used to giving more negative reveiws than positive ones. The depth of the (very congruent) story line is nothing short of amazing. Think: Bejeweled meets old school text-based D&D,RPG with fantasy cut-shots and dialog boxes and choices)I have heard the PSP version is more visually appealing,but the game is so good that I don'tconcern myselfwith that,being a rpoud DS owner.

The fact that you can play through first as any one of four career types and re-play it as another career is a real plus.

Each career/job such as wizard, Druid, Knight,Warrior, changes how the game is played. There are variations (of the rules and action) of the game within the game depending on whether you a wizard or druid, whether you are researching spells, seiging cities, capturing or training mounts (ridable living vehicles such as hugh rats etc)the rules of the jeweled part of the game changes drastically making the game as different as zuma is from pac man, even though the game challenges (fights,seiges,spell researches) appear on the same grid, the rules are very different. The time spent in grid action is actually less than you will and should spend in the RPG dialog,choices,leveling up,equipting weapons,spells and such. Even though this is so,you couldjump right into the action by choosing "instant action" if you just want to gem swap...

The grid action of the game is TURN BASED,you making your jewel swap, then your opponent,then you, then opponent etc... makes this game farm ore strategic than one would initially imagine. One can play the board as easily as Bejeweled or with the same in-depth strategy of a chess game. A fact that I personalydidnt realize until my 100th or so challenge.

Try this game I PREDICT YOU WILL BE DRAWN IN BEFORE YOU REALIZE IT. Hours slip away before you think of putting it down. In between each grid action challenge there are conversations with Kings,Queens, slaves etc, each which require you to answer then,mak decisions which therefor change your story and direction.If you are thinking it (the RPG part) might be a 'cookie cutter' series of choices - actions - choices - reactions, would be very, very wrong.

I know a thing or two about game - program writing and the interaction of the rpg aspect of the game must have been a real pain as the odds are far against you from the begining. These odds change based on each and every choice you make Let me repeat that...,These odds change based on each and every choice you make, from ONE SECOND TO THE NEXT. This includes a particualr jewel swap choice , a weapon choice, protection choice (sheilds, helms etc),spell choice (rpg section) to an amazing extent.

If you are like me, and try finding patterns (or holes) in the (artificial intelligence or game engine aka AI)game play action-reaction -responses and your choices (in an attempt to gain an edge) you will be hard pressed to do so here.

EVEN IF you won EVERY CHALLENGE on the first play-through,you would have to play (with or without a cheat(there aren't any)), you would have to play 450+ games ( a very conservative figure) just to complete the single player mode. This is because there are 150(basic) quests available in single player mode. That's assuming you don't take any of the side quests,which are also numerous. The games ability to repeatedly set goals which inspire the player to take to the grid-action yet again, is very well done, making the swap-grid-action, as entertaining the 100th time,as the first.

I realize this all sounds too good to be true,but this groupd of game writers - developers deserve fame,noteriety and financial gains there are to be had. It'sa great game that I personallywould have paid a great dealmore for, had I realized the concept,depth and entertainment value,prior to purchase.Get it and YOU WILLget your moneys worth. Enjoy!

Tyger Kralin

[edit] Trivia

Anyone else find it amusing that you have to battle Rodents of Unusual Size in a place called Gildor? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.86.83.196 (talk) 03:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Original story?

An "original story"? Although I have never played the game, I can assure you that if I had, the chances of me calling the story "original" would be very slim. Due to my lack of expertise, I am leaving the article be for the moment.

I've played some of it. It's cliché paradise. 70.53.49.187 18:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that in this sense, "original" means that it isn't based on one of the existing RPG franchises or settings.--MythicFox 14:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wii version

There's no official confirmation, so I haven't added anything to the article, but Amazon has this listed for the Wii, complete with cover art -- fueling speculation that this will be released for the console. Some links about it: [1][2][3][4] -- MisterHand 16:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yup, I think it will be announced at E3 next week if this is real, but even at Amazon, I'll wait for official word from D3 Publishing on it. --Masem 17:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Puzzle quest PSP.jpg

Image:Puzzle quest PSP.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

This has now been addressed by adding the appropriate rationale. No further action should be needed. --Slordak 12:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Xbox 360 Co-op

Price: 1200 Microsoft Points Availability: Not available in Korea Dash Text: [ESRB: E10+ (EVERYONE 10+) Suggestive Themes] Single Player, Xbox LIVE Multiplayer 1-2, Local Multiplayer 1-2, HD (High Definition). Classic puzzle game action meets an epic RPG story of good vs. evil. Features enhanced graphics, HD support, and Co-op multiplayer over Xbox LIVE. There are no refunds for this item. For more information, see www.xbox.com/Live/accounts.

Anyone know about how this is implemented? JAF1970 15:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I know I'll find out through playing, but haven't seen any reports of this yet. I know it's supposed to include competitive play, maybe Major Nelson messed up? --MASEM 15:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


There is no Co-op. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.186.74.225 (talk) 06:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Release dates paragraph

The release dates paragraph sure seems like it would do better as a table, or could perhaps be eliminated in favor of the material in the infobox. A prose list of "Was released on X on Y. was released on P on Q. ..." doesn't seem appropriate.

I don't know what the usual style is for video games, so I'm not just doing it myself. Jordan Brown (talk) 06:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mobile Version is Out, and it's quite different

Mobile Version for NA is out, and I've playing it since 3/APR/08 (and it was released before that).

Major differences:

  • shorter title: it's now just "Puzzle Quest: Warlords"
  • 8 starting choices (of 4 starting professions, one of each gender)
  • no armors, weapons, or accessories at all. Instead, you gain random "runes". You have to "attune" the rune to your "hammer of the elements" by playing a game where you need to grab "potions" by eliminating whole rows with 4-of-a-kind or 5-of-a-kind. Different runes require rathering different number of potions (3-7). Should you reach an impasse (no moves left) the attunement is a failure. No spells are allowed during attunement. You can have max of 3 runes active on the weapon at a time.
  • some profession gets a LOT of runes, others get very few, but more spells. Some are better at creating skulls, and thus, doing direct damage
  • there are no mounts, thus no mount spells
  • if you defeat an opponent three times or more, you can choose to "learn a spell" from the opponent instead of just fighting it. You must fill your mana (two or three types) to 30 each by collecting mana before your opponent. Skulls can reduce the opponent's mana if collected. No spells are allowed during "learn a spell" battles.
  • one can have a maximum of 6 spells. As one learns more spells, one must pick and choose the best combination. No cool-off period
  • no companions
  • no citadel actions
  • gold earned goes toward towns, where one can choose "increase skill", where each attribute can be raised by paying an ever-increasing price per level
  • xp earned goes levels. Once level is gained, you get 4 character points that you can allocate to your attributes. However, some attributes cost up to 3 character points to raise by 1, while others are 1 to 1 ratio.

Let me know if you need more details about the mobile version. This was on Verizon V.CAST network, played on LG VX8300 --Kschang77 (talk) 00:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest making a new section ("Mobile version") and include a brief overview of these details, if you have such information. Puzzle Quest: Warlords should be redirected to point to that section. --MASEM 01:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] European PSP Version

I added the line saying that the french/german release has fixed the companion bugs because I personally own said version (French box, booklet, game in English) and the companions DO work. I have not found this discussed anywhere else on the net though, so I can't provide a link 194.154.200.108 (talk) 12:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Modred