Chronicles Of Shakespeare: Romeo & Juilet

By John Walker on October 20th, 2010 at 8:57 pm.

This is me before I start writing a post.

I can’t believe I’ve not heard of this game before. I spotted it while researching Daedalic’s A New Beginning. It’s a new episodic adventure series, the first title, The Chronicles Of Shakespeare: Romeo & Juilet.

Set in the London of 1590, the young poet William Shakespeare is yet to be Mr Famous. He’s trying to prove himself to a local theatre group – Lord Strange’s Men – by staging a brand new tragedy. That being the tale of two star-crossed lovers. It’s a combination of traditional adventure with puzzles, and… hidden object gaming. Ah well – it was going so well. As much as I may have a soft spot for the genre, a good adventure game they have yet to make. Perhaps this may be the one? So far I’ve only been able to find evidence of the game existing in German (available on Amazon in two days). But I’m still so intrigued by what is essentially Young William Shakespeare. See below for a trailer.

When I first saw it, I was rather strongly hoping this would be one of those barking mad ideas where all the events of Shakespeare’s plays turned out to have happened to him personally in his youth. However, this seems to be focused much more on an accurate and educational depiction of the development of the play. Which also sounds pretty special.

__________________

« | »

, , , .

34 Comments »

  1. Ignorant Texan says:

    Is the link to the trailer broken? I went to Daedalic’s website, and the artwork is very reminiscent of a ‘bodice-ripper’ cover. The idea is intriguing, though.

  2. the wiseass says:

    Romeo & Juliet, for sure. Or who is this “Juilet” you speak of?

  3. Marco Antonio says:

    only a german release?

  4. Daniel Rivas says:

    This reminds me, I keep meaning to read more Shakespeare. In English class some years ago I read R+J, The Merchant of Venice, A Midsummer’s Night Dream, Macbeth, the Tempest (I think) and one in which there are two twins who keep getting mistaken for each other – although this is a good synopsis for about half of his plays, I think, so never mind.

    Any recommendations?

    We also did Great Expectations and Pride and Prejudice and the Crucible and Lord of the Flies. Those are Shakespeare too, right?

    • John Walker says:

      I recommend seeing it performed, rather than reading it.

    • Gaytard Fondue says:

      funny guy, eh, Mr. Rivas?

    • Daniel Rivas says:

      I like reading plays; I dunno, I’m just one of those.

    • Daniel Rivas says:

      My wit, M. Fondue, is razor sharp. Razor sharp, and for this I am feared.

    • kreenB says:

      Titus Andronicus and Much Ado About Nothing.

    • jeremypeel says:

      John’s right to point out that strange educational and cultural quirk that now means it’s easy to forget that Shakespeare wrote plays, not novels. You should see Hamlet (or most of it, as it’s never performed in full). It’s on in Sheffield, like now. TO SHEFFIELD!

    • airtekh says:

      I went to see my cousin and her group’s performance of Henry V a while back.

      I must admit I didn’t have high hopes going in; I thought I would be bored out of my skull to be perfectly honest, but I couldn’t have been more wrong. Although it was quite hard to follow, dialogue-wise, it was so well acted that I could still get the gist of what was going on, and it was quite funny in parts too.

      I imagine that if I had sat down to read the thing I would not have liked it at all.

      @Daniel Rivas
      I’m pretty sure that none of the books/plays you mention at the end are by Shakespeare.

      Resisting the urge to use Wikipedia, Great Expectations is by Charles Dickens, Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen and I’m not sure about the other two – I’m almost certain that they’re not Shakespeare though.

    • Fede says:

      I love A Midsummer Night’s Dream… and whoever translated it into italian was a genius.
      The same cannot be said about the translations I read of Macbeth, unfortunately.

      Anyway, what’s wrong in liking to read plays? You need to read them before you choose which one to bring to the stage.

    • Igor Hardy says:

      I would recommend reading Hamlet, Otello, Henry V and Richard III (the one of Blackadder fame).

      Also, watch Ran – I found it much better than the original.

    • Fede says:

      Aww, forgot to add an emoticon at the end :(
      Hope it was clear I was just joking, and not implying it’s bad to read plays if you don’t plan to perform them.

    • Daniel Rivas says:

      Jeremy Peel: I came from Leeds to Brighton not a month ago. I am not going up to bloody Sheffield. Too far, too much!

      Airtekh: Aye, I was making jest. Sorry for the confusion. The Crucible is by Arthur Miller, and is a dramatisation of the Salem Witch Trials through the lens of McCarthyism. Well worth reading or going to see. Lord of the Flies is William Golding, of course! Though I preferred Rites of Passage.

      It seems the recommendation for Shakespeare’s plays are “most of them.” Are there any to avoid? I’m afraid I’ve not heard much good about Titus Andronicus.

    • Unaco says:

      The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus. It’s by Marlowe though. He was almost as good at tragedy. Just like his Faust was almost as good as Goethe’s.

      The only other obvious Shakespeare that hasn’t been mentioned would be Othello. Also, an alternative to seeing it performed, or just reading it, would be to voice it… get 4 – 6 people together, somewhere with leather armchairs, a fire, and spirits in heavy bottomed crystal glasses (optional: Cigar smoke)… everyone takes a part (or multiple parts), and read through.

    • Saiko Kila says:

      John Walker: “I recommend seeing it performed, rather than reading it.”

      Lazy TV-generation.

    • Foxfoxfox says:

      Oh if you’re going to read Faust go for Goethe please.

      I was very fond of the winters tale when I was taught about it at school but the teacher may have had alot to do with that.

      I think for the bestest enjoyment of some Shakespeare you might want to read and then go see it performed. Best of all would be to read through it with a companion book or actually better again someone well informed and patient by your side, because alot of time has passed and for most people there will be some decoding to do, and some context to begin to understand.

      Approached with someone knowledgable alongside and a bit of enthusiasm it really is remarkable literature.

      Also – an accurate representation of how the first folio plays were written ought to be enlightening because there are more books filled with what we don’t know or guess about the man that what we do.

    • Shazbut says:

      Julius Caesar is my favourite. My least is Twelfth Night, because I spent most of this year in a touring production of it, so it’s dead to me for a good while. Hamlet is good. Othello is good and relatively easy to read.

      I once worked for a few days with a team that were trying to reduce all of Shakespeare’s plays to half an hour so they could turn them into animated films for kids. They/we managed it for all except one: King Lear. It’s just too epic to reduce.

      Titus is clearly evidence of Shakespeare’s well documented appreciation of the works of Takashi Miike.

    • Jake says:

      Takeshi Miike actually did a sort of version of Henry VIII in ‘Sukiyaki Western Django’. Well, Henry VIII crossed with a Japanese spaghetti western, featuring miniguns and the entire cast speaking English phonetically.

    • sinister agent says:

      I can’t concur enough with the “watch it performed” comments above. A film/televised one can work, but they vary massively, and being there adds a lot. The BBC’s Hamlet last year was rather good.

      Seeing The Winter’s Tale was most memorable for me. It sags a bit in the middle, but the bookends, and particularly the courtroom scene, can be bloody powerful with the right cast. You can’t really go wrong with the huge ones, though – Hamlet, The Merchant of Venice, etc. Although personally I would steer clear of Romeo and Juliet, as it’s too easily mishandled.

  5. BoltingTurtle says:

    I concur. Reader’s theater is the stuff. Get drunk and do twelfth night. Get rained on and do Lear. Or Othello. But in any event, whatever plays you read, read them out loud, with a group. I’d recommend the same for any dialogues (Plato, Machiavelli, etc) you may have to read in the future. Particularly with Plato, they often contain hidden gems you’d usually overlook. We should do this on the TF2 server sometime… New game mode: kill the reader.

  6. HYPERPOWER! says:

    Let’s hope Juliet’s pulse is one of the hidden objects. Romeo obviously had no experience at point-and-click adventure games.

  7. negativedge says:

    Shakespeare wrote R&J somewhere around 1595 or 96, not 1590. And he was already quite well known at the time.

    I guess when you’re making a piece of shit video game, you don’t need to get things right.

    • sinister agent says:

      Actually, most estimates for R&J put it at around 1590-1595. 1590 is quite safely within a reasonable margin of error, given how little explicit information we have on it. Pinning it to a precise year and insisting any other is wrong is pedantic, silly, and pointless.

    • negativedge says:

      you would have to make the argument that R&J was written before Titus Andronicus in order to not sound ridiculous. that’s a pretty difficult argument to make.

  8. Jake says:

    I’ll hold out for The Chronicles of Shakespeare: Escape From Butcher Bay.

  9. jordan shoes says:

    your post are very helpful for me
    look forward more posts
    welcome to our web!
    jordans

  10. Mory Buckman says:

    That music sounds distractingly like Greensleeves. If they wanted to use Greensleeves, they should have used Greensleeves. That would have been an interesting choice. This way, it just sounds like a rip-off.

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>