Review

Welcome to Rune Fans Anonymous. Hi, I'm Hoss. I've been a fan of Rune ever since I played the demo. I can't help it. I had a fun time playing through the single-player game. I've played it numerous times at LAN parties; with the slicing and chopping and hacking and the blood-lusting and the limb throwing. I wanted to not like it. I knew the AI was bad. I knew the combat was simplistic and the levels linear. But I played it and had a good time. That's more than I can say for some other, more highly acclaimed, games. Truth be told, I'm a bit confused over how alluring Rune has been for me. I actually went to the trouble of trying to install the game using no less than 7 CDROM drives (more on that in a moment) just so I could play it again. And I can't explain why. I shouldn't like it that much. It's really not that good. Part of me is content to write the whole thing off as an under-indulged infatuation with non-ranged (i.e. melee) FPS combat. So goes the old adage: Feed a starving man a cracker and he'll think he's had caviar.

Let me start over, and try to be more efficient with this review.

Rune is gorgeous. But then, it ought to be. It's one of the second generation of games built with the Unreal engine, famed more for powering Unreal Tournament than Unreal. This engine is my favorite among the currently licensable engines. This isn't an engine review, however, but a game review. Nevertheless, it's important to point out the heritage behind the majority of the code in Rune, since it sets reasonable expectations for technical aspects of the game. Graphically, Rune exceeds those expectations. The texturing and lighting are gorgeous. Aurally, the sound effects that are used are very well composed. There are atmospheric and combat sound effects aplenty. Unfortunately, it seems Human Head decided that creatures in the viking world should be like women in 19th century America: seen and not heard. Ragnar subscribes to this philosophy, remaining tight-lipped throughout the entire game. His human foes occasionally utter an epithet or two, but recycle them to the extent that I almost wished they'd taken the same vow of silence as Ragnar. Almost, that is... I admit to brandishing a derisive smirk every time I heard one of the vikings yell "It's that bastard, Ragnar!" I'd murmur "bring it" under my breath, and then take full satisfaction in dispatching them in a swift, effortless, Steven Seagal-esque fashion. Maybe that's why Ragnar doesn't say anything. It would spoil the mood, and "Bring it!" isn't exactly a Norse colloquialism. But wait, did I just say 'effortless'? I did. That brings us to Rune's shortcomings: the gameplay and the AI.

There's more subtlety to the combat in Rune than is evident at first glance, but not much more. When you first start playing Rune, you might conclude that all you have to do is get close to something, stay close, and start clicking the mouse button to attack. Sure enough, you'll begin to progress through the levels that way. But that's the AI's fault, and not so much a failing of the combat system. Try the same approach in a multiplayer game and you'll get your head handed to you systematically. You might then get frustrated quickly and conclude that "this game sucks, the fighting is just random!" Not so. Well, at least the random part, you might still end up concluding that this game sucks. But the combat isn't random, it's all about timing. Timing and distance. Unfortunately for Rune, the only way to get proficient with the combat is to fight against something else that is proficient. News flash - the AI isn't proficient. I say this is unfortunate for Rune because I think that the poor performance of the AI in combat caused a lot of people to dismiss the game entirely, and they subsequently missed out on the most compelling aspect of Rune, namely it's unique offering of multiplayer melee. I need to qualify that statement somewhat. It's unique not so much because it's innovative, but because there currently aren't really any alternatives (do any of the MMORPGs have non-stat-based melee?). Also, by calling it the most compelling aspect of Rune, I don't mean to imply that it's particularly compelling compared to anything else.

I need to be more specific about the combat, because in addition to being basically the only gameplay element, it is also Rune's greatest missed opportunity. Playing Rune means swinging large weapons at everything. Some of the weapons are sharp, some are blunt. The differences are inconsequential. Remember that bigger == better and you've learned the rules. There is some subtlety to grasp, but if you play through the whole game, it won't be in the pursuit of combat mastery. As I said, the learning curve for the combat involves forming a synchronicity with the character movement and animations. Success comes when you've absorbed the timings involved in blocking, dodging and striking. Results are more dependent on anticipating than on reacting, which I find quite agreeable, and it was once I'd accepted this that I began extracting enjoyment out of the game.

But here we discover that Rune's dominant gameplay mechanic is also its biggest weakness. Ragnar's combat abilities are brutishly simplistic. Swing. Block. Dodge. Jump. Note that blocking is only an option if you've got a shield, and this is a good example of the underachieving feel of the combat. Let me put on my game designer cap for a second and ponder the possibilities of what should happen if I want to block and I don't have a shield. Thinking... Thinking... Eureka! Block with my weapon! Only it can't be a sustained block, as with the shield, but a timed block. But wait, if I can parry with my weapon, what's the advantage of a shield? Not to fear, I've still got my cap on... Eureka! If you parry, the time required to execute a counter-attack is greater than when you counter-attack after blocking with a shield. This makes sense, and it's also algorithmically parameterized and therefore tunable. This concept has the added benefit of being consistent with the (poorly balanced) weapon system. The larger weapons, namely the two-handed variety, take longer to swing, but have greater range. This sounds good in theory, but unfortunately the larger weapons are either too damaging, not slow enough, too ranged, or some combination of all of the above. This has the effect of producing a degenerate strategy that has everyone racing for the biggest weapons. The dwarven battle weapons are essentially the rocket launchers of Rune. It's impractical to prefer a quicker, more agile combat style using the one-handed weapons, and that's too bad.

I think better-balanced weapons, which actually embrace the range/damage/speed system, would make for more interesting and varied combat. It also seems much more feasible than the more ambitious yearnings that I had for Rune. Playing Rune, I couldn't help but immediately wish for more control in the combat, more options. Once I'd crested the gentle, rolling learning curve, I thought, "Ok, I get it. Now what can I do?" I wanted the training wheels to come off. I was sold on the idea of 3rd person melee combat and I wanted to roll up my sleeves and get into it, only there wasn't anything more into which I could get. I wanted to be able to execute different combos, such as a roll followed by an upward attack, or front-attack/back-attack combo, or a sustained spinning bull rush attack. The ability to control the swing arc, even if just categorically, would have amplified the combat variety tremendously, but this is a sticky UI issue. Another thing I've considered is allowing players to execute a single bloodlust attack at any time, by priming or charging themselves into it. For example, holding down the attack button for a short period (2.5-3 seconds?) unleashes a bloodlust swing that is unblockable. You'll be able to see it coming from your opponent, so you can dodge or block. If you block or parry the blow, you'll reduce the damage you receive, but the blow will also destroy your shield and maybe even destroy your weapon on a successful parry. If nothing else, it would have been nice if each weapon had a special move associated with it. This doesn't really impose any complexity on the interface, but adds some spice to the fighting. The fighting is very much in need of spice. The weapons can all be powered up by accumulating rune power and then using it, but none of these powers were very compelling, and none of them give the player an opportunity to be any more skilled in combat. Mostly, they just seem to further unbalance multiplayer play. In the games I've played, the prescribed reaction to a player that's bloodlusted or powered-up is to run away.

I can appreciate the technical difficulties of achieving the kind of combat that I wanted, but that doesn't keep me from wanting it.

The last issue that I want to address is the map design. Like everything else in Rune, the level design is competent. The game is very linear, but I don't religiously turn my nose up at that. I'm perfectly content to play through a well-scripted, linear, single player game. I have two complaints about the levels, and neither is the linearity. The first is the lack of, what's a good word... branches? No, secrets? 'Secrets' isn't really right either. What I'm talking about are little places in a map that you discover if you're being observant, curious, or even just plain methodical. So they're not outright secrets. These little areas on a map are there in the open if you look for them. There just weren't enough of these in Rune. I don't understand why, either, since the food and rune items represent the perfect reward system to the adventurous player.

My second complaint about the levels in Rune isn't their layout but their themes, or more to the point, the effect that the themes had on the creatures and enemies in Rune. Let me be clear, when I buy a game about melee viking combat, I don't want to spend my time dispensing abuse to large crab-like things. I play a melee viking game because I want to fight vikings, damn it! This is the same mistake committed by the unfortunate folks at LGS who made Thief. When I buy a game about thieving, I don't want to run around caves avoiding bizarre bug-like things. When I buy a game about thieving, I want to thieve! Is that so wrong? Getting back to the point, it's not that I didn't like the underwater cave levels, or the bowels-of-the-earth levels. I just didn't like how they were populated. I'm calling this a flaw in the levels, but maybe that's not fair. They're nice underwater caves, they really are. The root of the problem is actually with the AI.

Here's why. All things being equal, Rune probably would've had what I wanted: more vikings. However, if the player fights vikings through the majority of the game, then the vikings have to behave differently. They would need different fighting styles, different skills. Naturally, the player would encounter untrained, poorly equipped vikings in the early stages, and progressively stronger, better-equipped, more tactical and cunning vikings as the game advances. Unfortunately, all things aren't equal, and AI is particularly not equal. In fact, it's really hard. So instead of committing themselves to developing a number of distinct AI profiles, Human Head did what your average game developer would do - take the path of least resistance. In Rune's case, that meant populating the game with different kinds of creatures, none of which fight particularly well. But different creatures need different homes, and so we get underwater caves and lava caves and dwarf caves. So the bad AI and the nature of the levels go hand in hand.

Let's talk about the expansion pack, Halls of Valhalla, for a moment. The expansion pack is a joke. Shame on you Human Head. It's a joke NOT because it has no value, but rather because there is absolutely no good excuse for not having its features in the original game. I'm tempted to argue, with good evidence, that it's just a lightweight mod for Rune. Here's the "feature list" as stated on the official site:

• Two new play modes: Headball and Arena and a host of new characters.

• Online multiplayer play with access to all the original maps and characters featured in Rune as well as expanded, new content.

• Original in-game music content created exclusively for Rune: Halls of Valhalla.

• 33 new maps available across all game modes including seven maps designed by fans.

• Improved Internet code.

• New combat style with added defensive options such as the ability to deflect thrown weapons and improved shields.

Now let's break that down:

• Two new play modes: Headball and Arena and a host of new characters.

  
  Ok, two new MP gametypes. Fair enough. But I think this speaks more to how AWOL the MP experience was for Rune out of the box than to the strength of the expansion pack.

   

• Online multiplayer play with access to all the original maps and characters featured in Rune as well as expanded, new content.

  
  This one really floors me - how do you flaunt "online multiplayer play" as an expansion feature for a game built on Epic's engine?

   

• Original in-game music content created exclusively for Rune: Halls of Valhalla.

  
  I don't want to thumb my nose at audio as an important part of gaming, but when I see music listed as a feature, I think the marketing folks must have had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to create the feature list.

   

• 33 new maps available across all game modes including seven maps designed by fans.

  
  The community map makers for UnrealEd are the best in all of mod-dom. It bears repeating: Rune is a game built using Epic's engine, perhaps the most mapper friendly in the industry. Hell, even I've made a map with UnrealEd. A couple dozen maps don't justify the cost of the expansion pack.

   

• Improved Internet code.

  
  Read: 'bug fixes'. Or, perhaps more fairly, 'optimization'. Either way, this is best served in patch form, not expansion pack. Charging fans for optimizations is a good way to not have fans.

   

• New combat style with added defensive options such as the ability to deflect thrown weapons and improved shields.

  
  New combat style? That's a bald-faced lie. This 'feature' has 'bug fix' written all over it.

   

I'm coming down on HOV pretty hard. That's because I'm putting myself in the shoes of someone who paid for Rune. This isn't hard, since I'm someone who paid for Rune. I paid for HOV, too, mind you. I paid $10. For someone who bought Rune, the expansion pack is frustrating. I can't help but think that it all should have come with the first game I bought. But here's the catch: if you didn't buy Rune, you can buy HOV and get a fully playable multi-player only game. This little quirk makes HOV unlike your average under-achieving expansion pack. From this perspective, even the original full price of HOV (~$30?) isn't necessarily too bad, if you've got a hankering for the kind of multiplayer experience that HOV is offering. I think, in part, the fact that HOV functions as a stand-alone game is a conciliatory action on the part of Human Head. I think they knew full well the kind of hue and cry that would erupt from the masses if people were forced to buy both Rune and HOV in order to get Rune's viking melee action online. Regardless, I still want to give both a stern and puzzled glare in the direction of Human Head for the nature of these two games. At this point it's moot, as you can get Rune Gold, Rune and HOV combined, for around $20. That's about right. Throw in the Rune CO-OP Mod that a team of volunteers busted their butts on for over a year and you've bought some legitimate fun. (NOTE: Since Rune CO-OP is a community add-on, I didn't feel it should be factored into the multiplayer score.)

Final Thoughts

Is Rune fun? As always, it depends on you. I confess that I've had fun playing it, and that I continue to have fun playing it. It remains on my harddrive because late into the night at LAN parties, when people have left and those that remain have tired of the WWII shooter of the month, we fire up HOV and lop each other's heads off. Speaking of being on my harddrive - I almost forgot about the CDROM thing. Way back in the beginning of this review, I mentioned something about needing 7 CDROM drives to get Rune installed. Here's the deal: apparently Take 2 Interactive bungled up a batch of Rune CDs by overburning them with some extra junk - junk of which Human Head was apparently unaware. This overburn makes the CD unpalatable to various CDROM drives. Note to the tech support jerk at Take2: NO - it's not just the "cheap" CDROM drives, jackhole, it didn't work on my overpriced Plextor drive either. In fact, it didn't work on basically every drive I tried, including 3 "cheap" drives installed on new Dell Dimension machines. To make a long story less long, I eventually got the game to install using, get this, a really old NEC multispin 3x. And it's not just the slow speed that made it finally work, because I'd used a utility that lets you slow down regular drives and that didn't help. Anyway, this issue didn't effect my opinion of Rune or Human Head. I eventually got to install the game, and patching to v1.07 removes the CD requirement, thank God. However, the episode, and specifically the attitude adopted by Take 2, has placed Take 2 Interactive squarely and firmly at the top of my list. You know the list I'm talking about.

But back to Rune one last time. Like I said, Rune Gold is out now and probably already in bargain bins. If you've got a hankering for something slightly off the beaten path for action games, give Rune a stroll around the park. Personally, I give everything made with the Unreal engine at least one good glance. Rune had enough fun in it to get me to the finish line. Sadly, its lasting impression is mostly what it could have been instead of what it is.

UPDATE (20030629): Don't play Rune. Play Blade of Darkness, instead. It is the game that Rune should have been.

Tips

• If you can't reach a lizard, throw a weapon at it. This will knock the lizard off the wall. Be careful that you're not in a position where an unfortunate bounce of your thrown weapon would put it someplace where you couldn't reach it.

• On 'hard' difficulty, the loki soldiers are really difficult to behead. It can, in fact, feel quite random. I seemed to improve my chances of beheading them when I had the camera closer to the ground, thus looking slightly upward. The roman sword also seems to be the most effective at beheading the zombies. It can often be more efficient to just grab a torch if one is handy and burn them. They always burn, although it takes about 16 seconds for them to die.

• To toggle camera lock (to get a different view of Ragnar):

  • type set input c set runeplayer bcameralock tog in console, where 'c' is your key of choice. Or...

  • put C=set runeplayer bcameralock tog in the Rune\System\user.ini file, where 'C' is your key of choice.

• To take screenshot:

  • type set input x sshot in console, where 'x' is your key of choice. Or...

  • put X=sshot in the Rune\System\user.ini file, where 'X' is your key of choice.