Well, I really thought I was gonna do it this time. I thought I would beat Arena. I got about halfway through, and my game broke. Now it doesn't open, and if it does, it crashes within 10 minutes. I guess Bethesda really does never change.
Anyways, it's alright I guess. Anyways, it's really a victim of it's time more than anything. You can see a lot of the groundwork for later Elder Scrolls games here, which could be a compliment, but you can also just like play those games instead. It's limited by the resolution, capped at 320x200, which is just what computers could handle, it's not under their control, but it still detracts, because if I had to play this game in 1994, I would probably not play games, and do something else!
The controls are bad, but they can be changed in DOSbox, which let's be real, is the only way anyone is playing nowadays, and the controls were pretty standard for the time. They weren't nearly as forward thinking as Daggerfall was, and the lack of mouse look is a big limiter when you're often fighting close range enemies that can go below your field of view. The controls don't hold back the combat as much as they could though, and they actually do a pretty good job at replicating the feeling of rolling a die in a tabletop RPG, but without a group to play with you it doesn't feel quite as good. The later dungeons are hard as shit as a melee character, but I never felt completely dissuaded, but as stated I only was able to play half of the game, and I imagine they would be real grating to keep going through them as the lack of variety really stands out, the most variation basically being "now the floor is green!"
In conclusion, play Daggerfall, or hell play Skyrim or Oblivion, they actually feel surprisingly close to the gameplay loop of Arena. Nowadays, Arena is basically only to be looked back on to see the origin of the series, a game that required innovation, but limited itself to already established gameplay standards. Good enough, but utterly antiquated by it's later entries.
Anyways, it's alright I guess. Anyways, it's really a victim of it's time more than anything. You can see a lot of the groundwork for later Elder Scrolls games here, which could be a compliment, but you can also just like play those games instead. It's limited by the resolution, capped at 320x200, which is just what computers could handle, it's not under their control, but it still detracts, because if I had to play this game in 1994, I would probably not play games, and do something else!
The controls are bad, but they can be changed in DOSbox, which let's be real, is the only way anyone is playing nowadays, and the controls were pretty standard for the time. They weren't nearly as forward thinking as Daggerfall was, and the lack of mouse look is a big limiter when you're often fighting close range enemies that can go below your field of view. The controls don't hold back the combat as much as they could though, and they actually do a pretty good job at replicating the feeling of rolling a die in a tabletop RPG, but without a group to play with you it doesn't feel quite as good. The later dungeons are hard as shit as a melee character, but I never felt completely dissuaded, but as stated I only was able to play half of the game, and I imagine they would be real grating to keep going through them as the lack of variety really stands out, the most variation basically being "now the floor is green!"
In conclusion, play Daggerfall, or hell play Skyrim or Oblivion, they actually feel surprisingly close to the gameplay loop of Arena. Nowadays, Arena is basically only to be looked back on to see the origin of the series, a game that required innovation, but limited itself to already established gameplay standards. Good enough, but utterly antiquated by it's later entries.