Which of these series are best?
How many have any of you actually played? :o
It'a a toughie between Wizardry, M&M, and LoL.
I chose Wiz, though.
Printable View
Which of these series are best?
How many have any of you actually played? :o
It'a a toughie between Wizardry, M&M, and LoL.
I chose Wiz, though.
Even though I really don't take fancy of many of these games.
TBL had a BARD as a main character <3
Fallout. :colbert: (If you count the series as the first two only /nma)
Might & Magic, Wizardry and Bard's Tale are all good. Screw the Xbox Bard's Tale though.
The Elder Scrolls beats out the only other series I've played, Might and Magic. Fallout would've been a strong contender too, even though I haven't played anymore then a demo of the original.
EDIT: Oh I subconsciously followed Hux's post. I like Fallout 3 so if that was included in the series (not tactics though screw that) then it would have won.
I chose not too put Fallout due to it being recent, while TES last released a game several years ago.
And I like Fallout 3, but it pales in comparison to F1 and F2.
Wizardry and Ultima are the only ones I've played. Unless Morrowind counts. And I love Wizardry. Ahh...nostalgia.
Fallout, good god yes. So hardcore Fallout.
Uh wait what? F1 and 2 are a decade old and are pretty much the definition of golden CRPGs. And I thought when I said excluding F3 I indicated that I don't consider F3 of the same caliber :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Laddy
TES was pretty great before Oblivion.
Well, F3 came out about a year ago, while Oblivion came out 3 years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILFUh wait what? F1 and 2 are a decade old and are pretty much the definition of golden CRPGs. And I thought when I said excluding F3 I indicated that I don't consider F3 of the same caliber :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Laddy
TES was pretty great before Oblivion.
I'm confused here. What exactly is a CRPG?
An RPG that is usually American, German, British, or Canadian that relies less on story and more on statistics and combat. I'm referring specifically on hardcore, old-school CRPG's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression Moon
I can't really say. It's hard for me. It's almost an apples and oranges (and bananas and pineapple and...) sort of thing. They are all largely so different. Almost anyone here is just gonna call out one recent game they've played and say it's the best series, but that type of answer defeats the spirit of the question.
I have enormous respect for pretty much all of them. I've not played them all, but those I haven't, I've read ridiculous amounts of articles about. I've made a point of digging up really old CRPGs to play sheerly for historic value. By today's measure they may be nothing special, even more so, they might be thought backward, but they are so revolutionary honestly. Think about the things they brought about.
This is a good and a bad thing though. The devs back then wanted a more free-form D&D form, but programming restricted them from making a solve-it-with-any-scenario-you-can-dream-up game. Their limitations and the decisions they made based on them are the entire basis for modern RPGs.
When I was young and playing games like Dragon Quest I (Dragon Warrior) I was annoyed by the limited range of vision. It didn't even occur to me that part of the fun would be to map it out yourself and feel like you're really exploring. In games like Wizardry that's part of the fun. Most people now would see that as a bother and complain there is no mini-map and an arrow telling them exactly where to go, and I once would've agreed with them. Now I understand and respect near-aimless dungeon crawling without having my hand held.
Now that the technology is here, I wish modern devs would look back to the ideas that some of the older designers had in mind but couldn't truly accomplish.
We're so wrapped up in what has become the norm, we forget that some of the ancestors of modern CRPGs had far more original ideas and some brilliant concepts that have been left untapped. We have the technology now... dig back into some of CRPG history and use some of that awesomeness to actually innovate instead of sticking to the status quo of regurgitating a new FF-style or DQ-style JRPG all the time.
Stop taking the route Bethesda is taking with TES and retreating backward. Oblivion is fantastic, but if you took it's graphics and concepts and applied them back onto the bones of Morrowind, or better yet, Daggerfall... you'd have an incredible game with incredible scope.
Yearg, I'm holding back the tears...Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeargdribble
Yeah, who knew how much of a nerd I was, eh? Sorry I got a bit rambly. Every time I read over one these 20 page dissertations on the history of CRPGs from Akalabeth forward, all based heavily on D&D, I'm amazed at the originality of ideas. Such a wealth of ideas that a now being overlooked despite our technological ability to make them so.
Of course leveling is such a huger part of RPGs these days, but was slightly less so in a pre-CRPG era. The stat focus was just a roundabout way of trying to accomplish some characterization, but instead of being a means to an end, it became the end. Beyond that, if you look at a games like Daggerfall there are like a million stats and specializations. NO you can't be a master of all of them. NO you can't be every class simultaneously. NO you can't be best buds with every good and bad faction at the same time.
Even more. Actions had consequences. You go crawling unprepared and you get f***ed up. You don't have unlimited inventory space. You can't simply break laws and then pay a fine to get away with it. Have you thought of this concept in Oblivion? "Hey guard, sorry about killing that dude... he's 1000 Septims. We cool? Oh... and if I give you another 1000 can I kill your brother too? Really? Awesome!" Also, there was no danger. You couldn't accidentally wander into a dungeon and get mercilessly one-shotted because the monsters are far too high.
I used to like this. I didn't like the idea of being boxed in or of a game being too hard. After playing some older games I realize how silly this is. Games are about beating now. They aren't about enjoying the journey or about the experience. You play an RPG to level up really high and kick something's f***ing skull in. What about enjoying exploring and getting stronger but not necessarily becoming a demi-god? What about specialization where you can cast awesome spells, but you're made of paper or you're great with a sword and board, but you couldn't cast a decent cure spell to save your soul so you carry about 50 potions?
These days even paper mages are beefy and in most games that aspire to more of an old school, free-roaming style, you can still wear the beefiest armor, cast the biggest spells, and heal the crap out of yourself so much that it's a joke to waste inventory on consumables.
What about concepts like permanent death. Sounds terrible and harsh and even I think so, but do any games these days have any sense of urgency or danger? Not really. You can just quick load out a problem, not that it would be a problem because you have to do the equivalent of sticking a fork in a light socket to die in modern games.
That said, I'm intrigued a lot by Demon's Souls. It seems to be very much deeper than modern RPGs. There's an action element but not like Oblivion where you just hack all day. You have to know what you're doing. It's also very hard and there are dire consequences for failure. That type of danger makes success more satisfactory imo. It's apparently so hard that Destructoid couldn't finish the game in time to review it. I'll probably pick up a PS3 in November and this will be one of the first games I pick up.
I'm also enjoying Monster Hunter Freedom Unite. Not so much an RPG, but some elements. The difficulty is pretty intense and highly skill based. As a result, when you've been up against a wall for a while with a wyvern you just can't kill... and you farm up some better gear and you watch their attacks and you plan your strategy... when it actually works it is SOOO rewarding. By comparison, most RPGs these days are about as rewarding as slapping in a DVD, hitting the play button and managing to watch it through to the end.
Granted, these games are so much in the traditional CRPG genre, but they do have that cost/danger/reward ratio that made old CRPGs intense yet gratifying.
Oh okay, then i guess in my case it would be Diablo II and Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance as those are the only two I've played. I haven't beaten either though.Quote:
Originally Posted by LaddyAn RPG that is usually American, German, British, or Canadian that relies less on story and more on statistics and combat. I'm referring specifically on hardcore, old-school CRPG's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression Moon
Not entirely sure I'd agree 100% with the definition. Whilst those games can fall under the classification of RPG it's a broad one; they tend to be referred to as hack'n'slash or the like. Compared to say the PC Baldur's Gate games the idea that CRPGs are less story-heavy than JRPGs is blown apart. The difference is rather in emphasis. The western stories tend to be a bit darker (Sometimes well, sometimes in the manner of an emo teenager, but darker nonetheless) and moreover they tend to be a lot less linear in both choices and outcomes. Whereas in FFVII your biggest storyline consequence was who you went on a date with, in a CRPG the entire game can be changed by choices you make.
An excellent example of this is in Fallout. If you make a character whose intelligence is 1 or 2 (out of 10), they are retarded. This completely changes how other characters treat you, completely changes the dialogue options and such open to you, and basically makes it a very different game in plot/story terms. Or the numerous paths through Morrowind which one could take, with other ways to complete the game even if you murder characters integral to the main quest.