Missing the good old CRPG Days
jeff....@ccc-bbs.com
Where has all the CRPG gone?
There has been such a dry spell of true RPG that I think I might as well
force myself to enjoy other kinds of games (flight sims, action or the
dreaded action/adventure).
Even though there have been many games lately that are touting RPG status
they are really nothing more than action/adventure games.
Games that say they are RPG:
Daggerfalland Arena, ES(played for two weeks): Yes, it does have some RPG
elements but is more of an action/adventure than a true RPG. Example--go
to town (looks same as all others), talk to cardboard people (no real
interaction), get quest, hack, slash, hack, slash, crash (ha, ha).
Diablo demo(played thru with hacks): even less of a RPG than Daggerfall.
Hack, slash, hach, slash (reminds me of Gauntlet the video game with
better graphics).
Dungeon Keeper: Will it ever come out? Looks more like a sofisticated
Warcraft 2.
Ultima 8: Can we say Super Mario in Avatar gear?
I believe one has to look back a few years to remember when the last true
RPG was released.
Ultima 4,5,6,7: Now we're talking. Britannia wasn't a huge world but was
more detailed than any game above. Real NPC's with lives of their own.
They could actually interact with you/had names/jobs/information about
that strange artifact, etc. EACH TOWN AND DUNGEON HAD ITS OWN IDENTITY!!!
They looked and felt different with different people and ITEMS!!! WHEN YOU
GO TO ANOTHER LAND/TOWN/DUNGEON IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. THAT MAKES ONE
WANT TO EXPLORE THAT TINY LITLLE VILLAGE ON THAT ISLAND OR THAT DUNGEON
WHICH NO ONE (that people say) HAS RETURNED FROM.
My biggest problem with RPG of today is the quests are way too linear and
easy. Example--Daggerfall, kill off this evil xxxx in dungeon yyyy. In
Ultima the quests were intertwined with many people and places who you had
to find/meet/extract the info. from to complete the quest. Made for a much
more enjoyable journey.
Another feature lacking with RPG of today....no party system!!!!
Everything is moving to the single person DOOM interface. I really enjoy
using my warrior (equipped with obsidian weapons of course) taking out the
front "baddies" while my wizard casts the ever popular fireball along with
my cleric healing the mortal wound my useless thief just got from a fire
breathing dragon (ahh, the good old days).
Other REAL RPG I enjoyed:
Wizardry series (especially 7, great party system, great magic system)
Lands of Lore (sleeper of a game, a little too linear but solid, no
character generation system, boo, hoo)
Darklands (can think of as Daggerfall/Arena with poor graphics, great game
but NPC interaction was lacking a bit)
Might & Magic Series (great party system and magic system, NPC lacking).
MY WISH
Give me a good old party system RPG with:
Lots of magic and exotic items (can't have too many +5 obsidian magic axes
on hand)
Decent sized world with a few tough dungeons
NPC's that are integral to the plot!!!!!!
Enough hack & slash to aquire enough gold to obtain the better "goodies"
in the game.
Some tough adversaries (ex. The Guardian)
Some tough, intricate quests
A system to create your own characters
VGA GRAPHICS MINIMUM. If the game has all the above I don't care what it
looks like. I still boot up the old Ultima's just to remember the "good
old days".
Will a game in the future even come close to the total package given with
..say Ultima 4 or 5??
It's also amazing that these "old" games fit on ONE floppy disk. How can a
game such as Daggerfall (over 400MB in size) be so empty compared to these
"tiny" RPG's???
Anyone out there feel the same way?
Can anyone give me a ray of hope and tell me that there is a true RPG on
the horizon?
IS CRPG DEAD?????????????????????
CAN ANYONE SAVE ME FROM BECOMING JUST ANOTHER ACTION GAME PLAYER (maybe
I'll watch tv instead, I hear Melrose Place has a good episode on
tonight.)
ORIGIN save me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jeff
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Archilochos
jeff....@ccc-bbs.com wrote:
>Where has all the CRPG gone?
Well, until Ultima IX comes out, don't expect anything exciting in
this genre. I'm not excited about Diablo at all. Is it just me, or
does Diablo look awfully like Ultima VIII?
>There has been such a dry spell of true RPG that I think I might as well
>force myself to enjoy other kinds of games (flight sims, action or the
>dreaded action/adventure).
If game companies can put out as many quality RPGs as they do Strategy
games, I'd be a happy camper.
>Even though there have been many games lately that are touting RPG status
>they are really nothing more than action/adventure games.
Can't agree with you more here. I hate the first person perspective
being used in recent RPG titles such as Daggerfall. I think this type
engine lends itself to Doom type action games, not RPG's. For RPG's,
I prefer turn based combat. I know it's not realistic, but sometimes
games have to sacrifice realism for game play. I especially liked the
engine used for Betrayal At Krondor. First person perspective for
exploring, and third person, turn based system for combat. The two
tiered first person/third person perspective was really good.
Jason
Sarah Owens
>MY WISH
>
>Give me a good old party system RPG with:
>
>Lots of magic and exotic items (can't have too many +5 obsidian magic axes
>on hand)
>
>Decent sized world with a few tough dungeons
>
>NPC's that are integral to the plot!!!!!!
>
>Enough hack & slash to aquire enough gold to obtain the better "goodies"
>in the game.
>
>Some tough adversaries (ex. The Guardian)
>
>Some tough, intricate quests
>
>A system to create your own characters
>
>VGA GRAPHICS MINIMUM. If the game has all the above I don't care what it
>looks like. I still boot up the old Ultima's just to remember the "good
>old days".
Cool Drink of Water Productions is working on a "traditional" CPRG
called "Age of the Mystics" It sounds like it should fit your
wish list, and you can find more info on our web page:
http://www.relative-web.com/software/coolh20
>
>Will a game in the future even come close to the total package given with
> ..say Ultima 4 or 5??
You can check our large compilation of shareware CRPGs on our page as
well.
I recomend playing (In no part. order):
Yendorian Tales 1&2 (3 is in the works)
Exile 1&2 (3 should be out early next year)
Excelsior (the sequel should be comming in Jan. w/ SVGA graphics)
Nahlakh
Aethra Chronicles
Warwizard 1
There are also PLENTY more "old school" CRPGs being made:
http://www.relative-web.com/software/coolh20/develop.htm
Regards,
David Avery
Davis J. Bassan B.S.
jeff....@ccc-bbs.com writes:
>Ultima 4,5,6,7: Now we're talking. Britannia wasn't a huge world but was
>more detailed than any game above. Real NPC's with lives of their own.
>They could actually interact with you/had names/jobs/information about
>that strange artifact, etc. EACH TOWN AND DUNGEON HAD ITS OWN IDENTITY!!!
>They looked and felt different with different people and ITEMS!!! WHEN YOU
>GO TO ANOTHER LAND/TOWN/DUNGEON IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. THAT MAKES ONE
>WANT TO EXPLORE THAT TINY LITLLE VILLAGE ON THAT ISLAND OR THAT DUNGEON
>WHICH NO ONE (that people say) HAS RETURNED FROM.
Of course all these ultima's thoroughly sucked. U3 was last good rpg put
out by origin. I kept trying the later ultimas but everyone was extremely
disappointing, quite simply not fun to play at all.
Greg Wheatley
jeff....@ccc-bbs.com writes:
>Where has all the CRPG gone?
I believe that the conventional marketing wisdom is that there isn't
sufficient market for them. So that big companies are no longer prducing
what would be recognised as classic CRPGs, but instead are seeking to
broaden the potential market by including other elements.
Not good, obviously, but one result has been that shareware developers
have arisen to fill the void left. Thus games such as the Exile series
(which I rate as two of the better CRPGs available _at all_) and
Nahlakh, amongst others. Both incidentally, would seem to contain all of
the elements that you mention as being desirable.
>There has been such a dry spell of true RPG that I think I might as well
>force myself to enjoy other kinds of games (flight sims, action or the
>dreaded action/adventure).
I hear you. The games I buy are now predominantly strategy, on the
grounds that such things as Fantasy General and Heroes of Might and
Magic II are a kind of bastard CRPG fix (not to mention being damn good
games). There's just something about playing a necromancer in HOMM2, and
taking on thousands of peasants so that you can raise their putrefying
corpses as a skeletal horde to serve your evil whims...
>My biggest problem with RPG of today is the quests are way too linear and
>easy. Example--Daggerfall, kill off this evil xxxx in dungeon yyyy. In
>Ultima the quests were intertwined with many people and places who you had
>to find/meet/extract the info. from to complete the quest. Made for a much
>more enjoyable journey.
>Another feature lacking with RPG of today....no party system!!!!
>Everything is moving to the single person DOOM interface. I really enjoy
>using my warrior (equipped with obsidian weapons of course) taking out the
>front "baddies" while my wizard casts the ever popular fireball along with
>my cleric healing the mortal wound my useless thief just got from a fire
>breathing dragon (ahh, the good old days).
Try Exile and Exile 2. Available via the web.
>Anyone out there feel the same way?
Yes.
>Can anyone give me a ray of hope and tell me that there is a true RPG on
>the horizon?
A couple of Interplay's forthcoming titles offer some hope.
>IS CRPG DEAD?????????????????????
>CAN ANYONE SAVE ME FROM BECOMING JUST ANOTHER ACTION GAME PLAYER (maybe
>I'll watch tv instead, I hear Melrose Place has a good episode on
>tonight.)
Shareware.
Regards,
Greg
--
"It stands no chance. Yes, it is a Microsoft product. A Microsoft
operating system, even. But I am a Zen Master. Gather the mops and
buckets, for they shall shortly be required."
http://www.gu.uwa.edu.au/users/greg/
jeff....@ccc-bbs.com
In article <E37t0...@iglou.com>,
fre...@iglou1.iglou.com (Davis J. Bassan B.S.) wrote:
>
> jeff....@ccc-bbs.com writes:
>
> >Ultima 4,5,6,7: Now we're talking. Britannia wasn't a huge world but was
> >more detailed than any game above. Real NPC's with lives of their own.
> >They could actually interact with you/had names/jobs/information about
> >that strange artifact, etc. EACH TOWN AND DUNGEON HAD ITS OWN IDENTITY!!!
> >They looked and felt different with different people and ITEMS!!! WHEN YOU
> >GO TO ANOTHER LAND/TOWN/DUNGEON IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. THAT MAKES ONE
> >WANT TO EXPLORE THAT TINY LITLLE VILLAGE ON THAT ISLAND OR THAT DUNGEON
> >WHICH NO ONE (that people say) HAS RETURNED FROM.
>
> Of course all these ultima's thoroughly sucked. U3 was last good rpg put
> out by origin. I kept trying the later ultimas but everyone was extremely
> disappointing, quite simply not fun to play at all.
Everyone has their own opinion on what's best but many feel Ultima's 4,5,6 (also
7 depending on who you talk to) were the last TRUE RPG. Check out Computer
Gaming World (November, 1996) which rates Ultima 4 as the second best game of
ALL TIME behind Civilization. All games have their faults but I can say Ultima 3
was a little more hack and slash than the later Ultima's. It also had less true
NPC interaction but the game was still good and still a worthy RPG (I completed
every Ultima from 1 to the horrendous 8). Can't say that about Stonekeep
(dungeon romp with bugs that took how many years to be released?).
I would like to know what RPG's released lately you have enjoyed?
Carol Dunster
On 30 Dec 1996 08:05:01 GMT, tali...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Greg
Wheatley) wrote:
> Try Exile and Exile 2. Available via the web.
>snip<
> A couple of Interplay's forthcoming titles offer some hope.
>
>Regards,
> Greg
>--
>"It stands no chance. Yes, it is a Microsoft product. A Microsoft
>operating system, even. But I am a Zen Master. Gather the mops and
>buckets, for they shall shortly be required."
> http://www.gu.uwa.edu.au/users/greg/
Greg - could you tell us *where* on the web to find these? Thanks!
Carol
VuNguyen
Someone asked, so here's the Age of Mystics site:
http://www.dynamic-web.com/software/coolh20/
Btw, I agree with everyone who's saying that CRPG's have been in a dry
spell for the last few years. The last one I actually enjoyed was U8 WITH
the patch (controversial, I know). Anyhow, 1997 seems to be turning into
the year of the CRPG though. Betrayal at Antara, Return to Krondor, U9,
Shadows over Riva, talk of a new Wizardry. Not too mention sequels to
some of the better shareware games out there.
Here's hoping I have enough free time on my hands this next year to
indulge.
David Avery
>There are also PLENTY more "old school" CRPGs being made:
>http://www.relative-web.com/software/coolh20/develop.htm
>
>Regards,
>David Avery
>
For some reason my newreader is posting with my girlfriends address.
Sorry for any confusion
-David Avery (david...@mailhost.net)
Darin Johnson
>>Where has all the CRPG gone?
>
>this genre. I'm not excited about Diablo at all. Is it just me, or
>does Diablo look awfully like Ultima VIII?
Really? I saw the demo for about 5 minutes, but it looked like
hack and slash with no role playing. Very unlike Ultima 8.
(yeah, all the ultima die hards hated 8, but I never played the
early ones until after I did 8)
--
Darin Johnson
da...@connectnet.com
Darin Johnson
> Not good, obviously, but one result has been that shareware developers
>have arisen to fill the void left. Thus games such as the Exile series
>(which I rate as two of the better CRPGs available _at all_) and
>Nahlakh, amongst others. Both incidentally, would seem to contain all of
>the elements that you mention as being desirable.
I've always thought this a good "market" for FREEWARE (I much prefer
freeware over commercial, and prefer commercial over shareware :-).
If source is available, there could be tremendous development on a
game! Compare to freeware MUDs which have had an army of developers
working on them, some doing the base code, some doing networking, some
working on intermediate game code, and others designing areas. They
wouldn't have gone very far if they were stuck in a shareware
environment.
So, who wants to work on a collaborative CRPG system and game?
>>Another feature lacking with RPG of today....no party system!!!!
>>Everything is moving to the single person DOOM interface. I really enjoy
>>using my warrior (equipped with obsidian weapons of course) taking out the
>>front "baddies" while my wizard casts the ever popular fireball along with
>>my cleric healing the mortal wound my useless thief just got from a fire
>>breathing dragon (ahh, the good old days).
I don't know. Pen-and-paper RPG's are one-person systems. The one
person playing multiple characters is distinctly a CRPG thing, and to
me they remove a bit of role playing. They are good for combat though
(perfectly loyal characters with perfect communication and morale),
but combat is a minor part of RPG's. Single view CRPG's always felt
more RPGish to me, whereas with a party I always got into a strategy
mindset instead.
--
Darin Johnson
da...@connectnet.com
Joe
> >Can't agree with you more here. I hate the first person perspective
> >being used in recent RPG titles such as Daggerfall. I think this type
> >engine lends itself to Doom type action games, not RPG's. For RPG's,
> >I prefer turn based combat. I know it's not realistic, but sometimes
> >games have to sacrifice realism for game play. I especially liked the
> >engine used for Betrayal At Krondor. First person perspective for
> >exploring, and third person, turn based system for combat. The two
> >tiered first person/third person perspective was really good.
>
> you would have more than three possibilities to attack (P/;/. in
> Ultima Underworld).
Well, I couldn't agree with you more! Anyone who wants realistic
combat in a role playing game just has no idea what actual combat
is like!:
"Yep, I know you had a 23rd level character, but the fact of the
matter is, while you were distracted by the knight, one of his
peasants came around behind you and hit you whomped you with
his shovel. You're dead."
Joe.
D Rapp
Dietmar Logoz wrote:
<snip>
> I have not played Albion, but what I saw from it did not look bad. It
> lacks character generation, though.
Check our review of this game on the Games Domain review site at
http://www.gamesdomain.com for more info.
> >>There has been such a dry spell of true RPG that I think I might as well
> >>force myself to enjoy other kinds of games (flight sims, action or the
> >>dreaded action/adventure).
> >
> >If game companies can put out as many quality RPGs as they do Strategy
> >games, I'd be a happy camper.
> >>Even though there have been many games lately that are touting RPG status
> >>they are really nothing more than action/adventure games.
> >
> >Can't agree with you more here. I hate the first person perspective
> >being used in recent RPG titles such as Daggerfall. I think this type
> >engine lends itself to Doom type action games, not RPG's. For RPG's,
> >I prefer turn based combat. I know it's not realistic, but sometimes
> >games have to sacrifice realism for game play. I especially liked the
> >engine used for Betrayal At Krondor. First person perspective for
> >exploring, and third person, turn based system for combat. The two
> >tiered first person/third person perspective was really good.
>
> No game combat is realistic, it is always an abstraction; in reality
> you would have more than three possibilities to attack (P/;/. in
> Ultima Underworld).
The first person perspective is Ok for a single character; but terribly
unrealistic for parties.
> There is a game to come that might be what you both want: Shadows over
> Riva.
> See http://sir-tech.com/coming/riva/
This game is the third in a trilogy that started with "Blade of Destiny",
then "Star Trail".
<snip>
Dan
Dietmar Logoz
In message <5a75do$p...@nnrp1.farm.idt.net> - jaso...@mail.idt.net
(Archilochos) writes:
>jeff....@ccc-bbs.com wrote:
>
>>Where has all the CRPG gone?
>
>Well, until Ultima IX comes out, don't expect anything exciting in
>this genre. I'm not excited about Diablo at all. Is it just me, or
>does Diablo look awfully like Ultima VIII?
I have not played Albion, but what I saw from it did not look bad. It
lacks character generation, though.
>>There has been such a dry spell of true RPG that I think I might as well
>>force myself to enjoy other kinds of games (flight sims, action or the
>>dreaded action/adventure).
>
>If game companies can put out as many quality RPGs as they do Strategy
>games, I'd be a happy camper.
>
>>Even though there have been many games lately that are touting RPG status
>>they are really nothing more than action/adventure games.
>
>Can't agree with you more here. I hate the first person perspective
>being used in recent RPG titles such as Daggerfall. I think this type
>engine lends itself to Doom type action games, not RPG's. For RPG's,
>I prefer turn based combat. I know it's not realistic, but sometimes
>games have to sacrifice realism for game play. I especially liked the
>engine used for Betrayal At Krondor. First person perspective for
>exploring, and third person, turn based system for combat. The two
>tiered first person/third person perspective was really good.
No game combat is realistic, it is always an abstraction; in reality
you would have more than three possibilities to attack (P/;/. in
Ultima Underworld).
There is a game to come that might be what you both want: Shadows over
Riva.
See http://sir-tech.com/coming/riva/
The german version is already out (it is a German game) and I have
played a bit with it. It is similar to BAK, but with character
generation (up to six plus one optional NPC member), lots of spells
(and not the usual ones) and very detailed combat - but not linear.
The only downside is that the NPCs do not appear on the streets (as
in Legends of Valour (!) or Daggerfall (like I have read), but you
have to walk by a certain point to get a pop-up window with a
dialogue.
The graphics are VGA (SVGA for the online manual); the screen shots
(?) on the SIRTECH site look better than the actual pictures in the
game - but maybe this is one of the games one should not play with a
17" Trinitron monitor (time to activate my 15" monitor again...).
Dietmar
lo...@ibm.net
Lance Berg
> >>Another feature lacking with RPG of today....no party system!!!!
> >>Everything is moving to the single person DOOM interface. I really enjoy
> >>using my warrior (equipped with obsidian weapons of course) taking out the
> >>front "baddies" while my wizard casts the ever popular fireball along with
> >>my cleric healing the mortal wound my useless thief just got from a fire
> >>breathing dragon (ahh, the good old days).
>
> I don't know. Pen-and-paper RPG's are one-person systems. The one
> person playing multiple characters is distinctly a CRPG thing, and to
> me they remove a bit of role playing. They are good for combat though
> (perfectly loyal characters with perfect communication and morale),
> but combat is a minor part of RPG's. Single view CRPG's always felt
> more RPGish to me, whereas with a party I always got into a strategy
> mindset instead.
- Although pen and paper RPGs can be single player, they rarely are, rather
- they are multiplayer. Each player usually controls a single character, it is
- true. One of the things I like about computer RP is that I need to fit only
- my own schedule, the GM is always ready to go, doesn't mind if I play
- five minutes, go fix my daughter lunch, play 12 hours straight, wake up at
- 3:15 and play some more, break to check my email... Multiplayer
- rpgs with each player having first person viewpoint would perhaps
- be ideal if attempting to simulate "p&p" rpgs, but would lose the very
- thing I like most, which is the flexibility of true single person gaming
- (me and the machine, regardless of how many characters may be involved.)
- For the multiplayer experience, what I would like to see released, and this
- would likely be best done as public domain for the reasons you suggest,
- is CARP, computer aided role playing. Give the GM access to situation
- setup, some control over opponents actions, but all rules tabulated, rolls
- made, etc. by the machine. I played SSI Gold Box combats (my six
- against 50 mixed bad guys in some cases) which would have taken hours
- on tabletop, in minutes. This could turn my campaigns into something
- other than a series of interconnected combats: right now the combats take
- so long that even if only one occurs every few game days they still take up
- half of all table time! I never roll for random encounters, as I simply don't
- want to waste the time on relatively meaningless combat, even though this
- destroys some of the flavor of the game...
- Lance
jeff....@ccc-bbs.com
In article <slrn5cgbbo...@connectnet1.connectnet.com>,
da...@connectnet1.connectnet.com (Darin Johnson) wrote:
>
> > Not good, obviously, but one result has been that shareware developers
> >have arisen to fill the void left. Thus games such as the Exile series
> >(which I rate as two of the better CRPGs available _at all_) and
> >Nahlakh, amongst others. Both incidentally, would seem to contain all of
> >the elements that you mention as being desirable.
>
> I've always thought this a good "market" for FREEWARE (I much prefer
> freeware over commercial, and prefer commercial over shareware :-).
> If source is available, there could be tremendous development on a
> game! Compare to freeware MUDs which have had an army of developers
> working on them, some doing the base code, some doing networking, some
> working on intermediate game code, and others designing areas. They
> wouldn't have gone very far if they were stuck in a shareware
> environment.
>
> So, who wants to work on a collaborative CRPG system and game?
>
> >>Everything is moving to the single person DOOM interface. I really enjoy
> >>using my warrior (equipped with obsidian weapons of course) taking out the
> >>front "baddies" while my wizard casts the ever popular fireball along with
> >>my cleric healing the mortal wound my useless thief just got from a fire
> >>breathing dragon (ahh, the good old days).
>
> I don't know. Pen-and-paper RPG's are one-person systems. The one
> person playing multiple characters is distinctly a CRPG thing, and to
> me they remove a bit of role playing. They are good for combat though
> (perfectly loyal characters with perfect communication and morale),
> but combat is a minor part of RPG's. Single view CRPG's always felt
> more RPGish to me, whereas with a party I always got into a strategy
> mindset instead.
>
> Darin Johnson
> da...@connectnet.com
I do agree with you Darin that single RPG are a bit more like true RPG but I
have no trouble controlling a party with me, "The Avatar as in Ultima's"
deciding what to do and where to go. I guess it's ones mindset and game design
as to whether one can feel that a party system can be successful in a RPG. Any
other thoughts?
Jeff
Darin Johnson
>I do agree with you Darin that single RPG are a bit more like true RPG but I
>have no trouble controlling a party with me, "The Avatar as in Ultima's"
>deciding what to do and where to go. I guess it's ones mindset and game design
>as to whether one can feel that a party system can be successful in a RPG. Any
>other thoughts?
Well, Ultima is a bit different than the SSI gold box games as well.
In Ultima, it's more like having smart NPC's (though not quite, as you
can still direct them). With SSI, you've got full control over all
characters, in short, all 6 are *your* characters; you rolled them,
you decided upon their background (as if that matters in CRPGs :-),
chose their skills, divied up their treasure, and so forth.
Come to think of it, I think intelligent NPC's would be very suitable,
and the player has little control over what they actually do, but can
discuss marching order, tactics, and the like, and hope the plan
survives contact with the enemy. Actually, with a good CRPG system
(my dream freeware one), it might be nice to be able to do either
style using the same backend and graphics; multiple players is the
base, with intelligent npc's being multiple processes, and a single
player with multiple characters is a front-end that controls the
multiple processes.
(and then, I never liked the gold box series that much, way way WAY
too much tedious combat. I think maybe one reason why I like single
person games is that combat tends to be quicker. Some people love
combat, but that makes the game more of a simulation than an RPG in
many ways.)
--
Darin Johnson
da...@connectnet.com
Greg Wheatley
cdun...@Ritzville.org (Carol Dunster) writes (querying me):
>> Try Exile and Exile 2. Available via the web.
>>snip<
>> A couple of Interplay's forthcoming titles offer some hope.
>Greg - could you tell us *where* on the web to find these? Thanks!
>Carol
I could, if I happened to remember the URLs (which was why I didn't
mention them originally). But there are pointers to them on the
excellent Age of the Mystics web page (which has been referenced
elsewhere in this thread).
Stephen Swann
In article <32C8F8...@success.net>,
Lance Berg <emp...@success.net> wrote:
:
[...]
:made, etc. by the machine. I played SSI Gold Box combats (my six
:against 50 mixed bad guys in some cases) which would have taken hours
:on tabletop, in minutes. This could turn my campaigns into something
:other than a series of interconnected combats: right now the combats
:take
:so long that even if only one occurs every few game days they still take
:up
:half of all table time! I never roll for random encounters, as I simply
:don't
:want to waste the time on relatively meaningless combat, even though
:this
:destroys some of the flavor of the game...
So, don't make them meaningless. :-) I often use random encounters as
raw material for my own machinations. Ok, so they've just encountered
a group of bandits. Are these "bandits" independant operators, or
were they sent by someone? Who would want your players
captured/robbed/murdered? Or were the bandits after the players at
all? Maybe someone rich/important person, or an enemy of some local
lord was supposed to be passing through here, and your characters just
happened through, instead. It could get pretty hairy if there was a
case of mistaken identity, or the bandit leader isn't very bright, or
maybe they just decide to supplement their income a little bit while
they're waiting. And before you know it, the situation will just
develop a life of its own, and voila, no longer a meaningless encounter.
Heck, a storyine that took up more than a year of my old AD&D campaign
started with a randomly rolled orc encounter.
Yes, I realise this group is for the discussion of *C*RPGs. I'll
shut up now. ;-)
--
Stephen Swann * Speak to me in many voices;
sw...@panix.com * make them all sound like one...
FD-Clipper WB-clip * - S. Pearlman / B.O.C.
SpidWeb
>Greg - could you tell us *where* on the web to find
>these? Thanks!
http://members.aol.com/SpidWeb/
I just registered a big fancy new domain (spidweb.com) and am busily
assembling a new website. I will post when it's ready.
- Jeff Vogel, Keeper of Exile
Try Exile: Escape From the Pit and Exile II: Crystal Souls
Hot shareware frpg's for PC Windows and Macintosh.
http://members.aol.com/SpidWeb/
jmo...@ix.netcom.com
>Ultima 4,5,6,7: Now we're talking. Britannia wasn't a huge world but was
>more detailed than any game above. Real NPC's with lives of their own.
>They could actually interact with you/had names/jobs/information about
>that strange artifact, etc. EACH TOWN AND DUNGEON HAD ITS OWN IDENTITY!!!
>They looked and felt different with different people and ITEMS!!! WHEN YOU
>GO TO ANOTHER LAND/TOWN/DUNGEON IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. THAT MAKES ONE
>WANT TO EXPLORE THAT TINY LITLLE VILLAGE ON THAT ISLAND OR THAT DUNGEON
>WHICH NO ONE (that people say) HAS RETURNED FROM.
>
The world of Ultima CRPG's towers over all others in its genre.
Carol Dunster
On Thu, 02 Jan 1997 06:24:14 GMT, jmo...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>
> The world of Ultima CRPG's towers over all others in its genre.
>
I have to agree!
Carol
Lord Dracon
How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 16:33:29 -0600, jeff....@ccc-bbs.com wrote:
>Where has all the CRPG gone?
>
>There has been such a dry spell of true RPG that I think I might as well
>force myself to enjoy other kinds of games (flight sims, action or the
>dreaded action/adventure).
>
>Even though there have been many games lately that are touting RPG status
>they are really nothing more than action/adventure games.
>
>Games that say they are RPG:
>
>Daggerfalland Arena, ES(played for two weeks): Yes, it does have some RPG
>elements but is more of an action/adventure than a true RPG. Example--go
>to town (looks same as all others), talk to cardboard people (no real
>interaction), get quest, hack, slash, hack, slash, crash (ha, ha).
>
>Diablo demo(played thru with hacks): even less of a RPG than Daggerfall.
>Hack, slash, hach, slash (reminds me of Gauntlet the video game with
>better graphics).
>
>Dungeon Keeper: Will it ever come out? Looks more like a sofisticated
>Warcraft 2.
>
>Ultima 8: Can we say Super Mario in Avatar gear?
>
>I believe one has to look back a few years to remember when the last true
>RPG was released.
>
>Ultima 4,5,6,7: Now we're talking. Britannia wasn't a huge world but was
>more detailed than any game above. Real NPC's with lives of their own.
>They could actually interact with you/had names/jobs/information about
>that strange artifact, etc. EACH TOWN AND DUNGEON HAD ITS OWN IDENTITY!!!
>They looked and felt different with different people and ITEMS!!! WHEN YOU
>GO TO ANOTHER LAND/TOWN/DUNGEON IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. THAT MAKES ONE
>WANT TO EXPLORE THAT TINY LITLLE VILLAGE ON THAT ISLAND OR THAT DUNGEON
>WHICH NO ONE (that people say) HAS RETURNED FROM.
>
>My biggest problem with RPG of today is the quests are way too linear and
>easy. Example--Daggerfall, kill off this evil xxxx in dungeon yyyy. In
>Ultima the quests were intertwined with many people and places who you had
>to find/meet/extract the info. from to complete the quest. Made for a much
>more enjoyable journey.
>
>Another feature lacking with RPG of today....no party system!!!!
>Everything is moving to the single person DOOM interface. I really enjoy
>using my warrior (equipped with obsidian weapons of course) taking out the
>front "baddies" while my wizard casts the ever popular fireball along with
>my cleric healing the mortal wound my useless thief just got from a fire
>breathing dragon (ahh, the good old days).
>
>Other REAL RPG I enjoyed:
>
>Wizardry series (especially 7, great party system, great magic system)
>
>Lands of Lore (sleeper of a game, a little too linear but solid, no
>character generation system, boo, hoo)
>
>Darklands (can think of as Daggerfall/Arena with poor graphics, great game
>but NPC interaction was lacking a bit)
>
>Might & Magic Series (great party system and magic system, NPC lacking).
>
>MY WISH
>
>Give me a good old party system RPG with:
>
>Lots of magic and exotic items (can't have too many +5 obsidian magic axes
>on hand)
>
>Decent sized world with a few tough dungeons
>
>NPC's that are integral to the plot!!!!!!
>
>Enough hack & slash to aquire enough gold to obtain the better "goodies"
>in the game.
>
>Some tough adversaries (ex. The Guardian)
>
>Some tough, intricate quests
>
>A system to create your own characters
>
>VGA GRAPHICS MINIMUM. If the game has all the above I don't care what it
>looks like. I still boot up the old Ultima's just to remember the "good
>old days".
>
>Will a game in the future even come close to the total package given with
> ..say Ultima 4 or 5??
>
>It's also amazing that these "old" games fit on ONE floppy disk. How can a
>game such as Daggerfall (over 400MB in size) be so empty compared to these
>"tiny" RPG's???
>
>Anyone out there feel the same way?
>
>Can anyone give me a ray of hope and tell me that there is a true RPG on
>the horizon?
>
>IS CRPG DEAD?????????????????????
>
>CAN ANYONE SAVE ME FROM BECOMING JUST ANOTHER ACTION GAME PLAYER (maybe
>I'll watch tv instead, I hear Melrose Place has a good episode on
>tonight.)
>
>ORIGIN save me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SpidWeb
> The world of Ultima CRPG's towers over all others in its genre.
No doubt. I've made a large number of fans (and registrations) by building
on the amazing framework Lord British developed. Ultima V is the only game
I'll tell people they should play instead of the Exile games. It's just
too cool. Not to be missed.
- Jeff Vogel, Keeper of Exile, Spiderweb Software, Inc.
Try Exile, Exile II, and now Exile III: Ruined World
Hot shareware frpg's for PC Windows 3.1/95 and Macintosh.
Look at http://www.spidweb.com
Edward Franks
My glass typewriter shows Lord Dracon saying...
> How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
How about realizing most of us don't have that newsgroup on our news
servers?
Edward
--
Edward Franks | efr...@msn.com
Fortran Dragon of the -==(UDIC)==- | xy...@ponyexpress.net
Microsoft Certified Product Specialist | Adventure's in Fortran
D Rapp
Edward Franks wrote:
>
> My glass typewriter shows Lord Dracon saying...
> > How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
>
> How about realizing most of us don't have that newsgroup on our news
> servers?
>
> Edward
Besides, Marcus and his ilk need to realize that those who played the
"good old CRPGs" were on this newsgroup long before someone decided
that it should be split. I plan to continue using this newsgroup to
discuss CRPGs, both old and new. I don't see anything in the name that
says this newsgroup is only for "current" CRPGs.
Dan
Lord Dracon
Please beg your server for the chance to suscribe it is getting
lonely.
On Sat, 4 Jan 1997 13:26:28 -0600, xy...@ponyexpress.net (Edward
Franks) wrote:
>My glass typewriter shows Lord Dracon saying...
>> How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
>
>How about realizing most of us don't have that newsgroup on our news
>servers?
>
>Edward
>
Ingo
I'm just curious why so many people have to quote a whole message just
to write one stupid line like this???
On Sat, 04 Jan 1997 08:41:46 GMT, dracon*@loom.net.au (Lord Dracon)
wrote:
>How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
>
>
>
Lord Dracon
But are you going to post to the new newsgroup.
On Sat, 04 Jan 1997 23:57:20 -0800, D Rapp <dr...@gte.net> wrote:
>Edward Franks wrote:
>>
>> My glass typewriter shows Lord Dracon saying...
>> > How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
>>
>> How about realizing most of us don't have that newsgroup on our news
>> servers?
>>
>> Edward
>
Lord Dracon
Are you going to post to the newsgroup??
Edward Franks
My glass typewriter shows D Rapp saying...
> Edward Franks wrote:
> >
> > My glass typewriter shows Lord Dracon saying...
> > > How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
> >
> > How about realizing most of us don't have that newsgroup on our news
> > servers?
>
> "good old CRPGs" were on this newsgroup long before someone decided
> that it should be split. I plan to continue using this newsgroup to
> discuss CRPGs, both old and new. I don't see anything in the name that
> says this newsgroup is only for "current" CRPGs.
I like the idea of having both. When this newsgroup is swamped
with posts about the current rage, it will be nice to go to a
newsgroup specifically desgined for those old classics I keep
'rediscovering'. I hope we will see you in both newsgroups.
Lizard
> I like the idea of having both. When this newsgroup is swamped
>with posts about the current rage, it will be nice to go to a
>newsgroup specifically desgined for those old classics I keep
>'rediscovering'. I hope we will see you in both newsgroups.
>
Besides which, since fans of 'classic' CRPGS are likely to be older, there
will hopefully by less bandwidth wasted on "Sign me up for \/\/AR3Z!!!!!"
idiots and pointless flamewars over "This game r00lz and that game sux!".
That's the theory, at least. Of course, with my luck, the 'classic' newsgroup
will soon be overrun by people who consider Ultima VIII to be 'classic' since
it's over a year old. :)
Michael Solomon
>I'm just curious why so many people have to quote a whole message just
>to write one stupid line like this???
A friend of mine uses my account to send mail to someone. They never snip
anything. The messages just keep getting longer and longer. I really think its
because some people are just too lazy and don't want to be bothered with
snipping large portions of the message.
Edward Franks
My glass typewriter shows David saying...
> Could someone tell me the exact name for the classic crpg newsgroup?
Try alt.games.classic-crpgs.
D Rapp
Edward Franks wrote:
>
> I like the idea of having both. When this newsgroup is swamped
> with posts about the current rage, it will be nice to go to a
> newsgroup specifically desgined for those old classics I keep
> 'rediscovering'. I hope we will see you in both newsgroups.
>
> Edward
I may have been wrong here. I took LMD to mean that he preferred I quit
posting comments on "old" crpgs to this newsgroup. If so, my apologies
to LMD. I did check and do not have that newsgroup yet. I emailed my
provider and requested they add it. If so, sure, I'll show up there.
Dan
David
Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems
Some guy wrote:
>I'm just curious why so many people have to quote a whole message just
>to write one stupid line like this???
Trimming down messages presumes basic familiarity with a text editor,
which is *way* too much to ask of most computer users. Even the GUI
ones that support the mouse give most Internet For Dummies people
problems, let alone real editors you have to learn how to use.
Scott
Edward Franks
My glass typewriter shows D Rapp saying...
> > I like the idea of having both. When this newsgroup is swamped
> > with posts about the current rage, it will be nice to go to a
> > newsgroup specifically desgined for those old classics I keep
> > 'rediscovering'. I hope we will see you in both newsgroups.
>
> posting comments on "old" crpgs to this newsgroup. If so, my apologies
> to LMD. I did check and do not have that newsgroup yet. I emailed my
> provider and requested they add it. If so, sure, I'll show up there.
Well, I could have LMD wrong also <grin>. (I tend to ignore a
lot of his posts because he writes his replys at the top of the
message instead of at the bottom. I don't think he understands Usenet
propagation. I personally hate reading a reply and then having to
have to read the rest of the message to know what the hell he is
answering. It may just be me, but top to bottom posts are much easier
to read and understand, especially when you see the reply first.)
I wasn't in on the creation of ag.classic-crpgs (so I may not
know what I saying <grin>), but I personally don't want to see people
saying 'Thou Shalt Only Post x In This Newsgroup'. We should
certainly continue to encourage people to post all types of questions
here and questions about the 'classics' in the other. Hopefully, most
of the people in the other group will gently point people to this
group if, say, someone posted about Daggerfall there. Plus, if
someone needed detailed help on, say, Wizardry I for the _Apple II_, I
hope people here will point the poster to ag.classic-crpgs.
Terri Torrez
On 6 Jan 1997 17:55:03 GMT, soft...@mercury.interpath.com (Scott
McMahan - Softbase Systems) wrote:
>It seems to me that the rise of first-person games has caused a demise
>in RPGs based on paper-and-pen rules.
Although I think the rise in these games is related to the decline of
RPGs, I don't think it's the cause. I think the cause is the high
cost and low profit margin of good RPGs. I mean, why spend several
years and a lot of money developing a great RPG when the average game
player would be just as happy shelling out the same amount of money
for a game they can dump out quickly and cheaply. And while
complicated RPGs have a relatively small following, these
first-person, graphic-intensive games appeal to a much larger base.
I could be totally wrong, of course. But let's face it, if you're the
kind of game player that says "I don't care what the graphics look
like as long as it's a great rpg", then you're definately in the
minority of game purchasers. [I know i'm in this category, since I
resorted to re-playing Wizardry-Crusaders of the Dark Savant rather
than playing the new Wizardry. Rather nice of the game magazines to
make it available.] And, as much as we might hate it, we can't really
blame the game makers for going where the money is.
Terri Torrez
terri....@marcam.com
Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems
It seems to me that the rise of first-person games has caused a demise
exploring a real world that uses a highly abstract interface (tables of
just about everything on paper) with a lot of imagination; whereas the
computer RPG is bringing that world to life with graphics and
automating as much of the tables as possible. The goal would seem
to be to submerge all of the "stats" into the background and use
them solely to model the universe in which the CRPG is taking place.
If you look at the history of RPGs, you can plot a trend where each
successive generation has encorprorated more and more of the technology
that has been going into adventure and arcade games.
For example...
Temple of Asphai, Fool's Quest, etc: primitive 2D scrollers.
Gold box D&D: postage-stamp but first person view, dominated by
character stats. Graphics are very primitive.
EOB: Sophisticated 2D first-person with great graphics, still
postage stamp size.
Legends of Valor: Crude 3D interface similar to Castle
Wolfenstein.
Whatchacallit, I can't remember the name, the first Drow game
from SSI: more sophisticated but still 2 1/2 D game engine,
parallels Wolf3d->Doom jump in technology.
Thunderscape: DOOM-like interface with RPG stats in the
background.
Descent to Undermountain: Unapologetic use of a 3D action
engine with an RPG veneer.
I'd like to see (or write) an historical examination of the CRPG's
evolution into what it is today. Why don't some of the game magazines
write interesting articles like this?
Scott
Darin Johnson
>If you look at the history of RPGs, you can plot a trend where each
>successive generation has encorprorated more and more of the technology
>that has been going into adventure and arcade games.
Erk, those are all PC games! You can't do a history of RPG's and
ignore other systems. For instance, EOB was most liekly influenced by
Dungeon Master, and Faery Tale Adventure was unmatched for years. And
what about Wizardry, not in your list, but the game that started it
all (and it existed before the PC did). And Bard's Tale (Wizardry
with better graphics). What about Rogue and Hack? Omega, though
crude (and I have the author's permission to say so), has a lot of
ideas that are still fresh (and influencing games like Daggerfall).
What about Ultimas, the best CRPG's ever?
Don't know what it is about SSI's games that make some people think
they're great. They're good, but I've never considered any of them
great, or worth playing a second time.
--
Darin Johnson
da...@connectnet.com
Patrick Scott
I also think that no CPRG will ever replace the gatherings around the
table. Sitting around with your buddies, working hard to keep your prized
character alive, role-playing the encounters, going off on tangents that
the GM had no way of predicting, etc. I used to play - mostly as a GM -
RPGs, and no computer will replace it. There isn't enough storage space and
programming time to match the imagination of even one GM.
--
Patrick Scott
Computer and Network Consulting
psc...@visi.net
http://users.visi.net/~pscott
Ingo
What do you mean?
On Sun, 05 Jan 1997 21:44:14 GMT, dracon*@loom.net.au (Lord Dracon)
wrote:
>Are you going to post to the newsgroup??
Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems
Terri Torrez (terri....@marcam.com) wrote:
: Although I think the rise in these games is related to the decline of
: RPGs, I don't think it's the cause. I think the cause is the high
: cost and low profit margin of good RPGs.
That's probably true -- really hardcore games don't have the appeal
simpler ones do. (A lot of games now have "easy" and "hard" RPG modes!)
A corollary to the situation is people will go with established
companies who are known to develop programs that have a better than 50%
chance of running on your machine. The SSIs, the Interplays. Big
companies with resources to test games. I know my experiences with Star
Trail were horriffic, and I wanted to play it because it combined good
graphics with good gameplay, according to the reviews. But I never got
it running.
Scott
Carol Dunster
On Sat, 04 Jan 1997 08:41:46 GMT, dracon*@loom.net.au (Lord Dracon)
wrote:
>How about posting to alt.games.classic-crpgs.
>
I can't get that newsgroup and really enjoy these discussions, so
don't give up!
Carol
Stefan Schatzl
vung...@aol.com (VuNguyen) wrote:
>Someone asked, so here's the Age of Mystics site:
>http://www.dynamic-web.com/software/coolh20/
>Btw, I agree with everyone who's saying that CRPG's have been in a dry
>spell for the last few years. The last one I actually enjoyed was U8 WITH
>the patch (controversial, I know). Anyhow, 1997 seems to be turning into
>the year of the CRPG though. Betrayal at Antara, Return to Krondor, U9,
>Shadows over Riva, talk of a new Wizardry. Not too mention sequels to
>some of the better shareware games out there.
>Here's hoping I have enough free time on my hands this next year to
>indulge.
Does someone know about a new Might & Magic? I played the parts 2 (still the
best part) up to 4&5 (World of Xeen).
Stefan Schatzl
da...@connectnet1.connectnet.com (Darin Johnson) wrote:
>> Not good, obviously, but one result has been that shareware developers
>>have arisen to fill the void left. Thus games such as the Exile series
>>(which I rate as two of the better CRPGs available _at all_) and
>>Nahlakh, amongst others. Both incidentally, would seem to contain all of
>>the elements that you mention as being desirable.
>I've always thought this a good "market" for FREEWARE (I much prefer
>freeware over commercial, and prefer commercial over shareware :-).
>If source is available, there could be tremendous development on a
>game! Compare to freeware MUDs which have had an army of developers
>working on them, some doing the base code, some doing networking, some
>working on intermediate game code, and others designing areas. They
>wouldn't have gone very far if they were stuck in a shareware
>environment.
-- big snip --
Have you ever tried NetHack 3.1 with NHSound (TSR sound module) and VGA fonts?
The game runs in text mode with randomly generated levels. If you prefer
graphics, try Dungeon Hack from SSI which is basically a one-Person Eye of the
Beholder mixed with NetHack.
-- snip --
>--
>Darin Johnson
>da...@connectnet.com
D.D. Johnston
On 6 Jan 1997 21:29:26 GMT, da...@connectnet1.connectnet.com (Darin
Johnson) wrote:
<clip>
>
>Don't know what it is about SSI's games that make some people think
>they're great. They're good, but I've never considered any of them
>great, or worth playing a second time.
>
>--
>Darin Johnson
>da...@connectnet.com
On the other hand, I have played each of the Gold Box series games 3
or 4 times each. I think they're great mainly because of the character
development and the combat capabilities.
There are six characters that can be developed according to your style
of play. I usually used 2 fighters, 1 cleric, 1 thief, and 2 mages.
Each one could be developed individually and collectively with the
team. In the newer games, you get one character to develop. There is
no team interaction. Quite boring.
When the team went into combat, strategy had to be carefully planned.
Hopefully, your spellcasters could get the first roll and disable the
enemy spellcasters by either a "Hold" or "Fireball" spell. Then you
could rush your fighters in to take them out. You also had to be
careful not to hit your own characters with area spells or if it was
unavoidable, calculate which characters could afford to take the
hits. There is much more to the Gold Box series combat sequences but I
think the above is illustrative. In other words, you had options. In
the newer games, combat consists of holding down the right mouse
button and swinging the mouse back and forth and maybe tossing a spell
or two. No tactics or strategy whatsoever. Just slug it out mano a
mano or turn around and run.
I believe the single character games began with Eye of the Beholder
and have gotten progressively worse. You bet I miss the old days. CRPG
had some meaning then. Oh well!
ddj
Darin Johnson
>On the other hand, I have played each of the Gold Box series games 3
>or 4 times each. I think they're great mainly because of the character
>development and the combat capabilities.
But you could easily spend a day of real time getting from one end of
town to the other, just because of random combats cropping up that
took forever. The plot was hidden behind all the combat and details.
I personally don't like directing the actions of everyone, that's very
un-RPG like to me. I *KNOW* people disagree with this, so don't flame
me for my own opinions. This is great if you like combat, if you
think combat is just a tiny part of RPG, then it's annoying.
Plus, even worse, the combat and character creation is *extremely
AD&D. It's "official" after all. If you don't like AD&D, the game
can be excruciating with all the idiocies that it keeps around just to
be "official". For instance, multi-classed versus dual-class
nonsense. Character creation and definition is important to RPG's,
and D&D is severely lacking in that department (why else would every
other issue of Dragon come out with yet another class definition?).
SSI did some games I like though - Entomorph and Genie's Curse.
Neither got bogged down in stats or mapping or combat, and kept moving
through the story, and the story was interesting. Darksun's were fun
too, but really buggy. The Krynn game I played was absolutely horrid,
Azure bonds was so-so, and EOB I&II were mediocre. EOB's could have
been lots better just by abandoning the D&D base. The Gold Box games
were lacking when compared to contemporaries.
> I believe the single character games began with Eye of the Beholder
> and have gotten progressively worse. You bet I miss the old days.
EOB was certainly not the first to And EOB had multiple characters too.
I miss the old days too, but not the SSI part of it. I miss Faerie
Tale Adventure, Dungeon Master, and Black Crypt.
--
Darin Johnson
da...@connectnet.com
D Rapp
Darin Johnson wrote:
>
> >On the other hand, I have played each of the Gold Box series games 3
> >or 4 times each. I think they're great mainly because of the character
> >development and the combat capabilities.
>
> But you could easily spend a day of real time getting from one end of
> town to the other, just because of random combats cropping up that
> took forever. The plot was hidden behind all the combat and details.
> I personally don't like directing the actions of everyone, that's very
> un-RPG like to me. I *KNOW* people disagree with this, so don't flame
> me for my own opinions. This is great if you like combat, if you
> think combat is just a tiny part of RPG, then it's annoying.
Actually, if you had taken the time to read the manual, you would have
seen that you could individually put the characters on "auto" for the
combat. You wouldn't have been the least "annoyed" at controlling all
those characters. I am curious why you are playing rpgs, if you do not
like the combat. That's a trademark of rpgs. You might be much happier
playing adventure games.
> Plus, even worse, the combat and character creation is *extremely
> AD&D. It's "official" after all. If you don't like AD&D, the game
> can be excruciating with all the idiocies that it keeps around just to
> be "official". For instance, multi-classed versus dual-class
> nonsense. Character creation and definition is important to RPG's,
> and D&D is severely lacking in that department (why else would every
> other issue of Dragon come out with yet another class definition?).
What's the big deal? If you don't want to be dual- or multi-class; then
don't make the character that way. You could make the characters all single
class if you wanted.
> SSI did some games I like though - Entomorph and Genie's Curse.
> Neither got bogged down in stats or mapping or combat, and kept moving
> through the story, and the story was interesting. Darksun's were fun
> too, but really buggy. The Krynn game I played was absolutely horrid,
> Azure bonds was so-so, and EOB I&II were mediocre. EOB's could have
> been lots better just by abandoning the D&D base. The Gold Box games
> were lacking when compared to contemporaries.
When you say contemporaries, again you seem to be leaning away from rpgs.
The Gold Box games are hard to compare; since they were much older than the
others you mention. A '57 Vette rides like a log wagon, steers like a truck
and is much slower than a number of cars on the road today; but it still was
awesome for it's time. Also, many still enjoy them more than the new ones,
due to the challenge of them.
> > I believe the single character games began with Eye of the Beholder
> > and have gotten progressively worse. You bet I miss the old days.
>
> EOB was certainly not the first to And EOB had multiple characters too.
> I miss the old days too, but not the SSI part of it. I miss Faerie
> Tale Adventure, Dungeon Master, and Black Crypt.
Actually, I think he meant first person perspective games (gag).
Dan
Dietmar Logoz
In message <5atuog$1...@redstone.interpath.net> -
>A corollary to the situation is people will go with established
>companies who are known to develop programs that have a better than 50%
>chance of running on your machine. The SSIs, the Interplays. Big
>companies with resources to test games. I know my experiences with Star
>Trail were horriffic, and I wanted to play it because it combined good
>graphics with good gameplay, according to the reviews. But I never got
>it running.
Wait for Shadows over Riva, the last in the trilogy. I
already have it (the German version) and it runs fine, also
in an OS/2 DOS session.
Dietmar
lo...@ibm.net
Paulius Stepanas
In article <32d3e9f4...@news.whidbey.com>, ban...@whidbey.net (D.D. Johnston) writes:
>On the other hand, I have played each of the Gold Box series games 3
>or 4 times each. I think they're great mainly because of the character
>development and the combat capabilities.
>
>of play. I usually used 2 fighters, 1 cleric, 1 thief, and 2 mages.
>Each one could be developed individually and collectively with the
>team. In the newer games, you get one character to develop. There is
>no team interaction. Quite boring.
I agree with a lot of this. The two things I really miss from the
earlier games are:
1. Being able to manage an entire party, not just one character.
2. Combat being a tactical activity, not just clicking fast enough
in the right place.
OTOH, I did quite like Eye of the Beholder I & II, as they had great
mapping (one of my favourites) and puzzle elements, and not overly
many random encounters (the true scourge of the SSI series).
Betrayal at Antarra at least seems like it might address my second
point.
Paulius
--
~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~ These musings from:
~|~ It's a mistake trying to cheer up camels. ~|~ Paulius G Stepanas
~|~ You may as well drop meringues into a ~|~ Telstra Research Labs
~|~ black hole. ~|~ Melbourne, Australia.
~|~ Terry Pratchett (Pyramids) ~|~
~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~ p.ste...@trl.oz.au
The Dehumanizer
>Have you ever tried NetHack 3.1 with NHSound (TSR sound module) and VGA fonts?
>
>The game runs in text mode with randomly generated levels. If you prefer
>graphics, try Dungeon Hack from SSI which is basically a one-Person Eye of the
>Beholder mixed with NetHack.
And then there's Diablo, which is basically Angband mixed with Gauntlet...
_______________________________________________________________________
| |\ | Where all men think alike, | Scribe of Morrowind |
| The | )ehumanizer | no one thinks very much. | 'Sabbath' on Kali |
|_____|/_____________|_______-_Walter_Lippmann____|___Ravenous_Dragon___|
| email: dehum...@ip.pt www: http://www.ip.pt/~ip001367/home.html |
\ If you haven't played Warcraft II on Kali yet, you haven't lived. :) /