It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I only bought The Bards Tale for the three original Bards Tale games and wish I had'nt after seeing the version of BT3 that was used for this set.

Oh well back to playing them on the Amiga Emulator, better sound better graphics :)
Post edited January 31, 2013 by Macos10
...and more bugs.
The reason why it has the Apple II Bard's Tale, is because they never made a Apple II GS version of Bard's Tale 3. This collection is the same collection/update released on the Apple iOS, iphone and ipad.

It uses the Apple II emulator, probably because well the rights to the Amiga Kickstart roms is probably way too expensive? There is only like one company that has legal rights to sell them, IIRC, and they sell them in their own Amiga game collections (which go for as high if not more than $100?). The Apple II GS emulator is also one of the easiest emulators to run, and it has good speed.

Comparably speaking the Apple II versions of the first two games are superior to the Amiga version as well, at least in sound, and for the first game a better title screen (it contains an introduction, that was left out of the amiga version).

Yes, let me repeat, the first two Bard's Tale games are the Apple II GS versions. Those have better actual Synth sound, using realistic instruments. The amiga version uses a kind of lower quality sound that sounds more like electronic bleeps and bloops but they are not 'harsh' sounding, very mellow.

Both hav the same graphics as the Amiga version otherwise, except for some minor differences (or as mentioned Amiga has a less graphically robust title screen in the first game).

The Apple II GS versions are probably the finest versions of the first two games. I don't know about the Atari ST versions but its essentially built on the Apple II/Amiga versions as well, but I don't know how its sound chip compares.

So ya, stick with the Apple II GS versions of 1 and 2, they are worth it. Avoid the Classic Apple II version of III, except only to see the alternative intro cutscene (ok, ya some might be interested to give it a go to see the other alternative artwork throughout the entire game, if you can get past the primitive coloring book appearance, and "CGA" style coloring).

The Apple IIGS' sound was provided by an Ensoniq ES5503 DOC wavetable sound chip, the same chip used in Ensoniq Mirage and Ensoniq ESQ-1 professional-grade synthesizers. The chip allowed for 32 separate channels of sound, though most software paired them into 16 stereo voices, as did most of the standard tools of the operating system (the MIDISynth Tool Set grouped four channels per voice, for a limit of seven-voice audio). The IIGS is often referred to as a "fifteen-voice system," though one stereo voice is reserved by the OS at all times for timing and system sounds. Software that doesn't use the OS, or uses custom-programmed tools (most games and demos do this), can access the chip directly and take advantage of all 32 voices.

The computer's audio capabilities were given as the primary reason for record label Apple Corps's 1989 resumption of legal action against Apple that had been previously suspended. Apple Corps claimed that the IIgs' audio chip violated terms of the 1981 settlement with the company that prohibited Apple, Inc. from getting involved in the music business.

A standard 1⁄8-inch headphone jack was provided on the back of the case, and standard stereo computer speakers could be attached there. However, it provided only mono sound through this jack, and a third-party adapter card was required to produce true two-channel stereo, despite the fact that the Ensoniq and virtually all native software produced stereo audio (stereo audio was essentially built into the machine, but had to be de-multiplexed by third-party cards). Applied Engineering's SonicBlaster was one of a few developed cards for this purpose.
Post edited February 01, 2013 by Baggins
The Amiga version uses a kind of lower quality sound that sounds more like electronic bleeps and bloops but they are not 'harsh' sounding, very mellow.

I assume you are speaking of the emulator? The game on the Amiga had beautiful music, what little it had. Not beeps and bloops.
Post edited January 31, 2013 by thebes
avatar
thebes: The Amiga version uses a kind of lower quality sound that sounds more like electronic bleeps and bloops but they are not 'harsh' sounding, very mellow.

I assume you are speaking of the emulator? The game on the Amiga had beautiful music, what little it had. Not beeps and bloops.
The amiga hardware had essential 2 channel in monologue (playing up to 2 different notes through both speakers) or 4 channel if stereo (4 notes, but 2 per channel split). Otherwise with software virtualization it could mimic 8 channels through apparently volume trickery (however that sounds).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQpJnivocCs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTz5iwmtkrs

It sounds extremely synthesized. Not realistic. Not like real instruments per se. More like techno style music from the 80s. In my opinion its far more 'bleep and bloopy' than say an MT-32 or other high end wavetable style sound cards. Depends on how you interpret 'bleeps and bloops'. It's not the PC speaker, which is the worst. It's above tandy or basic apple II.

That being said ya it did have a notes that sound better than a generic bleeps and bloops even if they still sounded highly synthesized, and fakey, like some of the extremly tinny trumpet type sound, or when it tries to mimic a woodflute type sound. Just having grown up with friends with an Apple IIGS, there essentially were very few things that could compare to it during its day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZwEkp7ZTco

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8g7PJOV8KU

Based on those its not playing more than 2 notes each second. Ya, to my ear leaning to unrealistic synth bloops.

Sounds good, but no where near as good as the Apple II version, which used wavetable with more realistic instruments.

Of course its possible, that its impossible to actually find someone who is recording from an actual amiga. But 2-4 channels really isn'g toing to offer up that much complexity when it comes to sound.

Did listen to some atari-st music, and it sounds somewhat comparible to the atari ST's 4 channel sound, although maybe slightly better.
Post edited January 31, 2013 by Baggins
avatar
Macos10: I only bought The Bards Tale for the three original Bards Tale games and wish I had'nt after seeing the version of BT3 that was used for this set.

Oh well back to playing them on the Amiga Emulator, better sound better graphics :)
i may play that one more, i love those old graphics! thats a big part of the reason i play these old games! shoot, if you were looking for great graphics, you could always play the new wizardry game for the playstation 3!
avatar
Macos10: I only bought The Bards Tale for the three original Bards Tale games and wish I had'nt after seeing the version of BT3 that was used for this set.

Oh well back to playing them on the Amiga Emulator, better sound better graphics :)
avatar
ashout: i may play that one more, i love those old graphics! thats a big part of the reason i play these old games! shoot, if you were looking for great graphics, you could always play the new wizardry game for the playstation 3!
Again, for everyone not paying attention. The Apple II GS versions are the best versions if you are looking for best graphics, and best sound. They kick the living snot out of the Amiga versions. So play those on your bought copy of The Bard's Tale.

Basically for a development history;
Apple II (e/c/c+) version was the original release of BT1. There are a handful of other ports based on the graphics of that version.

The dos version came out several years later, with completely redone graphics, for almost everything. The amiga version came out a year after that, based mostly on the Dos artwork, but improved, better coloring. Then a year or so after that, the Apple II GS and Atari-ST versions were released, taking the same artwork from the DOS and Amiga versions. Added a new hires title screen and introduction (intro was missing from the Amiga version), in the case of the Apple II GS what music exists uses the superior Wavetable sound chip in the system. Plus a few cosmetic changes to some of the ingame artwork.

As for BT2 (c64 and apple II e/c/c+) versions came first (very different artwork and images). The EGADOS version came out about the same time, with very different artwork. The Amiga and Apple IIGS came out later based on the DOS artwork (other than color quality, the artwork is exactly the same in all three versions). The Apple IIGS version and Amiga version are basically identical in appearance, but Apple has the better sound (where sound is used).

When you get to 3, then you can decide to play the Amiga version if you want the 'best' looking and one of the best sounding versions of that that game. But remember its apparenlty one of the more buggy versions.
Post edited February 01, 2013 by Baggins
The back to the Amiga versions was a throw away line as I never played BT3 on the Amiga way back, I have a copy in my Amiga games collection but it has never been loaded.

Thanks for information on these games, some of it I knew and some of I did'nt.
avatar
thebes: The Amiga version uses a kind of lower quality sound that sounds more like electronic bleeps and bloops but they are not 'harsh' sounding, very mellow.

I assume you are speaking of the emulator? The game on the Amiga had beautiful music, what little it had. Not beeps and bloops.
avatar
Baggins: The amiga hardware had essential 2 channel in monologue (playing up to 2 different notes through both speakers) or 4 channel if stereo (4 notes, but 2 per channel split). Otherwise with software virtualization it could mimic 8 channels through apparently volume trickery (however that sounds).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQpJnivocCs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTz5iwmtkrs

It sounds extremely synthesized. Not realistic. Not like real instruments per se. More like techno style music from the 80s. In my opinion its far more 'bleep and bloopy' than say an MT-32 or other high end wavetable style sound cards. Depends on how you interpret 'bleeps and bloops'. It's not the PC speaker, which is the worst. It's above tandy or basic apple II.

That being said ya it did have a notes that sound better than a generic bleeps and bloops even if they still sounded highly synthesized, and fakey, like some of the extremly tinny trumpet type sound, or when it tries to mimic a woodflute type sound. Just having grown up with friends with an Apple IIGS, there essentially were very few things that could compare to it during its day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZwEkp7ZTco

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8g7PJOV8KU

Based on those its not playing more than 2 notes each second. Ya, to my ear leaning to unrealistic synth bloops.

Sounds good, but no where near as good as the Apple II version, which used wavetable with more realistic instruments.

Of course its possible, that its impossible to actually find someone who is recording from an actual amiga. But 2-4 channels really isn'g toing to offer up that much complexity when it comes to sound.

Did listen to some atari-st music, and it sounds somewhat comparible to the atari ST's 4 channel sound, although maybe slightly better.
On the Amiga it sounded better than the emulator. Wasn't as tinny sounding.
Well, that's a detail that's really not going to help people much nowadays, since people who play these games are generally limited to 'emulators'.

Even, the Appe II GS version with the superior sound, doesn't sound as good in an emulator, as it would on an actually apple IIGS. In which the guitar string sounds have more 'depth' and 'fullness' to them. It just happens to have a more complex musical score since it used about 15 voices (out of 32 total) compared to 2-4 in the Amiga. The technology it uses relies on better more realistic synth.

Overall, the Apple II sounds better, because it was using a more powerful and more advanced professional soundchip than the one used in Amiga.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6EkbfgXqWg

According to a post on Youtube, apparently from the musician/programmer involved in the game;

"It sounds a bit off from the IIgs version. Was this run on an emulator? When I wrote this code, I had a seperate bass track for the guitar so it had a very full sound. (Yes, I wrote this game)"

Compared to;
Bard's Tale AMIGA (assuming its emulator version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZwEkp7ZTco
Post edited February 03, 2013 by Baggins
avatar
Baggins: Overall, the Apple II sounds better, because it was using a more powerful and more advanced professional soundchip than the one used in Amiga.
Not really.

The IIgs had a 16 channel DAC. The Amiga had a 4 channel DAC. They're both just DACs. Nothing teribly different about the kinds of sounds you can produce unless you wanted to produce sound in more than 4 voices, which Bard's Tale doesn't do.

However, the IIgs's Ensoniq chip had 64kB of onboard ram, while the Amiga had shared ram (512kB) with the cpu and graphics chips. In practice, 64kB for many voices of audio is *TINY*, so Amiga music tended to be much better. For real music-making goals (using the computer as an instrument), the IIgs might have been a better fit, but for game goals, the Amiga's larger ram let it be used more like a sampler, and produced better results.

Of course, the IIgs version of the Bard's Tale is definitely superior, for many other reasons.