What old (pre-1995) cRPGs stand the test of time?

[makiavelli747]

Pretty much any game from 91 with vga graphics or text-based is good enough for me in 2017.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

To many Codexers I suspect Fallout will be the first CRPG that is both "historically important" and "fun".

I'm a 95-05'er, in that I rate that era as the golden era of gaming generally, ie: the perfect mix of slightly upgraded accessibility in exchange for vastly improved game worlds and design styles, and Fallout wasn't where I started nor what makes me believe that. I'd go even further and specify the peak as 2000-2002, just as 85-95'ers would probably cite 90-92 as a specific peak within their era.

Pre-95 has a very specific self image, that of excellent gameplay but terrible UIs and cartoony, very pixilated graphics, with the beep-beep-boop music and sound effects. Of course, one size doesn't fit all, but that's what someone imagines as soon as someone says "have you tried that great title from 1991..." before anyone's mentioned a specific title.

95-05 likewise has a very specific self image, that of slightly dumbed down gameplay, very acceptable UIs, much more mature/adult sprites (and lots of actual sprites!), only slightly pixilated graphics and real, yes, real music! Of course, one size doesn't fit all, etc etc, as above.

Of course, the less said about 05-13 the better, the lost generation as it were, where the gameplay got utterly crushed in exchange for a billion polygons and storyfaggotry while often regressing to clunkier UIs (resulting from console ports), and the music stayed pretty much a constant.

75-85 and 05-13 both represent the extremes of unplayability IMO, with 85-05 representing the peak of the bell curve, and what's in the middle of that? 1995/1996, you go a few years either way of that and you can't go much wrong:

And in this case, average person means average PC cRPG fan, not average gamer, obv. And only talking about wRPGs ofc, jRPGs likely have a completely different history, I'm not well versed enough in them to make any kind of point about them.

 

[Scroo]

I played the games from the olden times waaaaaaaay later, most of them just a few years ago and I'm still working my way through it so I went in completely unbiased.

What I enjoyed:

Wizardry VI & VII
Dark Heart of Uukrul
Might and Magic III - V (haven't played 1 & 2 yet)
The Realms of Arkania series
Lands of Lore
Eye of the Beholder
Blobbers in general actually
Fate: Gates of Dawn
Dark Sun
Al Qadim
The FRUA modules, if they count
Some of the Gold Box games
The Summoning
Ultima 1 (yeah seriously lol)
Tunnels & Trolls: Crusaders of Khazan

and a lot of other games I forgot or am too lazy to mention bc you get the idea

Some games I absolutely could not play:

Bard's Tale - the ridiculous amount of combat is disgusting.
Ultima IV - VII - for some reason I cannot get into it. I just can't.
The Magic Candle - I really wanted to like this one but jesus christ you move so slow and every time you move one step the pc speaker BEEPs and arghl

In general old games give me something newer games don't. It took me a while to realize, but old games tickle my imagination in a way a fancy AAA modern rpg cannot. Reading about the stuff that is there in this corner of the dungeon, the detailed description of what I see while actually just staring at a generic dungeon wall is so much more atmospheric than even a really beautiful game like Witcher 3. Sure, UIs are often badly designed, sometimes games have weird saving systems etc, but it's all worth it for this feeling of adventure.

I just love old rpgs and am incredibly happy I got to play them and still discover them so late, so that I can play them completely fresh.

 

[ProphetSword]

In general old games give me something newer games don't. It took me a while to realize, but old games tickle my imagination in a way a fancy AAA modern rpg cannot. Reading about the stuff that is there in this corner of the dungeon, the detailed description of what I see while actually just staring at a generic dungeon wall is so much more atmospheric than even a really beautiful game like Witcher 3. Sure, UIs are often badly designed, sometimes games have weird saving systems etc, but it's all worth it for this feeling of adventure.

This is exactly why I love the Gold-Box games. Using simple pictures and text, combined with the AD&D system and a fantastic combat engine, they captured my imagination and made me feel as though I was part of a real AD&D adventure. The abstract artwork and the colorful but concise prose does a lot to evoke feelings of intimate involvement in what's happening.

Compare that to some modern CRPGs that devolve into watching dull 3D models act out long-winded cutscenes. Sure, the UI is better, but the experience sucks. Talking heads standing in rooms. Yeah...super exciting.

Some people just won't get it. But, then again, some people are attracted to pretty lights. So be it.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

In general old games give me something newer games don't. It took me a while to realize, but old games tickle my imagination in a way a fancy AAA modern rpg cannot.

I just love old rpgs and am incredibly happy I got to play them and still discover them so late, so that I can play them completely fresh.

Salute. I like this.

On topic - Worlds Of Ultima: The Savage Empire was/is pretty cool from the small amount I played. The early Might & Magic games + whatever PC RPGs were ported to NES/SNES seem cool. I still have a lot of those older PC RPGs to go through yet so most of my recommendations would be old console RPGs right now.

On that note, a relatively lesser-known title on the Sega Genesis called Dungeons & Dragons: Warriors of the Eternal Sun is a DOPE RPG. Party-based, turn-based, large open-ish world to explore, etc. It blends isometric/overhead-style exploration + tactical combat with first-person dungeon-crawling with action combat. To put it simply, the game becomes a first-person dungeon-crawler when you enter an indoor/dungeon area, and outdoor areas are typical turn-based, strategy-style combat. Really cool. 100% playable, very unique and still a great RPG to play, IMO.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

This is exactly why I love the Gold-Box games. Using simple pictures and text, combined with the AD&D system and a fantastic combat engine, they captured my imagination and made me feel as though I was part of a real AD&D adventure. The abstract artwork and the colorful but concise prose does a lot to evoke feelings of intimate involvement in what's happening.

Compare that to some modern CRPGs that devolve into watching dull 3D models act out long-winded cutscenes. Sure, the UI is better, but the experience sucks. Talking heads standing in rooms. Yeah...super exciting.

Some people just won't get it. But, then again, some people are attracted to pretty lights. So be it.

Yep. Also why I'm a big fan of Vogel's games. The reliance is on text/writing and less on audio/visual to create the picture in your imagination.

 

[Morality Games]

Goldbox UI and combat are not fun today. They were dated even in the early 90's.

They're fun in the sense their most fundamental and bulkiest parts are D&D 2nd Edition turn-based combat battles, using old artwork and graphics to represent the content.

They're the easiest of the old RPGs to just sit down and plow through.

 

[octavius]

To many Codexers I suspect Fallout will be the first CRPG that is both "historically important" and "fun".

I'm a 95-05'er, in that I rate that era as the golden era of gaming generally, ie: the perfect mix of slightly upgraded accessibility in exchange for vastly improved game worlds and design styles, and Fallout wasn't where I started nor what makes me believe that. I'd go even further and specify the peak as 2000-2002, just as 85-95'ers would probably cite 90-92 as a specific peak within their era.

Pre-95 has a very specific self image, that of excellent gameplay but terrible UIs and cartoony, very pixilated graphics, with the beep-beep-boop music and sound effects. Of course, one size doesn't fit all, but that's what someone imagines as soon as someone says "have you tried that great title from 1991..." before anyone's mentioned a specific title.

95-05 likewise has a very specific self image, that of slightly dumbed down gameplay, very acceptable UIs, much more mature/adult sprites (and lots of actual sprites!), only slightly pixilated graphics and real, yes, real music! Of course, one size doesn't fit all, etc etc, as above.

Of course, the less said about 05-13 the better, the lost generation as it were, where the gameplay got utterly crushed in exchange for a billion polygons and storyfaggotry while often regressing to clunkier UIs (resulting from console ports), and the music stayed pretty much a constant.

I'm of the "second generation" (the PLATO generation being the first) myself, that is from the generation of the first home computers, and in the computer games department there's nothing more nostalgic for me than thinking about that sense of wonder old ZX Spectrum games like Lords of Midnight, Fairlight and Tir Na Nog et al gave me. But Spectrum games are mostly unplayable now, due mainly to the UI. I still like the visuals of old Spectrum games, so bright and colourful, in contrast to the washed out Commodore 64 colours, which objectively was a superior machine, especially in the sound department, but it lacks the charm of the Speccy IMO.

The next "generation" for me was when I got an Amiga in 1988, and discovered games like Bard's Tale, Dungeon Master and The Gold Box games. 1985-1993 was the Golden Age of CRPGs, but I still think the really Golden Age of PC Gaming in general was from 1998 to November 15, 2001, with games like the IE games (which I personally think improved on my beloved Gold Box games in most areas), Thief: The Dark Project, HoMM 3, and the Age of Wonders games.

So for me there were three main eras of "golden" computer gaming, and playing games chronologically I'm now at the start of the Golden Age in early 1998.
I reckon the darkest years of 2007 to 2011 will not take a long time to get through...

 

[Fowyr]

But Eamon opened up my eyes, so I really wanted to know if there are more interesting games like it. I would say my short lived journey opened my eyes, at least regarding graphics. But gameplay and enjoyability are not negotiable.

Oh, have you seen my list? Check first part of it. Al of these games are really enjoyable and very diverse in their subgenres.
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/list-of-the-must-play-games.55367/

 

[Jason Liang]

Instead of playing the original pre-VGA versions of some of these RPGs, you might try the console remakes of-
Pool of Radiance (NES)- but you wont be able to import if you plan on playing through to Pools of Darkness
Wizardry I, II, III (Legacy of Llegamyn), V (SNES)

I love Darklands, but one thing I hate when playing Darklands, Gold Box games and Crusaders of the Dark Savant is copy protection. So for those games at least play a version that slkips copy protection.

You also have to realize that cursor input games didn't really get popular until 1994 or so. Pre-1994 we were still using WASD and the numberpad (as someone notes, Sid Meier loves the number pad).

 

[Deuce Traveler]

Pre-1995 games that are still a blast today:

- Rogue
- The Lords of Midnight
- All the Gold Box games, and especially FRUA with DnD module conversions
- The Magic Candle
- Dark Heart of Uukrul
- Might and Magic III
- Might and Magic IV
- Might and Magic V
- Might and Magic: Worlds of Xeen
- Ultima V
- Darklands
- Quest for Glory I (1992 version)
- Quest for Glory IV
- Wizardry VII
- Betrayal at Krondor
- Knights of Xentar
- Ultima VII
- Elder Scrolls: Arena
- Jagged Alliance

I know your list only includes computer RPGs, but I also recommend the following Sega Genesis RPGs from before 1995:
- Shining Force
- Shining Force II
- Shadowrun

There are many other games that are fun, though the interfaces can make them a bit of a chore for new players.

 

[octavius]

Instead of playing the original pre-VGA versions of some of these RPGs, you might try the console remakes of-
Pool of Radiance (NES)- but you wont be able to import if you plan on playing through to Pools of Darkness

Why the hell would you play a dumbed down, censored version?

 

[makiavelli747]

but I still think the really Golden Age of PC Gaming in general was from 1998 to November 15, 2001, with games like the IE games (which I personally think improved on my beloved Gold Box games in most areas), Thief: The Dark Project, HoMM 3, and the Age of Wonders games.

Why HoMM 3?

 

[octavius]

Because it's a great game??

 

[Jason Liang]

Instead of playing the original pre-VGA versions of some of these RPGs, you might try the console remakes of-
Pool of Radiance (NES)- but you wont be able to import if you plan on playing through to Pools of Darkness

Why the hell would you play a dumbed down, censored version?

Where is the NES version censored or dumbed down?

 

[octavius]

Instead of playing the original pre-VGA versions of some of these RPGs, you might try the console remakes of-
Pool of Radiance (NES)- but you wont be able to import if you plan on playing through to Pools of Darkness

Why the hell would you play a dumbed down, censored version?

Where is the NES version censored or dumbed down?

According to Mobygames:

The NES version was substantially different from other versions. It removed references to the Adventure's Journal and some of the more complex features of the computer versions, like different currency units. Battles were significantly reduced in size, the graphics were overhauled and redesigned so that the game could be controlled with a control pad, and music was written for it. A randomly generated dungeon feature was also removed.

And the US branch of Nintendo was notorious for its draconian censorship, making Disney look positively liberal in comparison.

 

[makiavelli747]

Because it's a great game??

Its most casual in the series, HoMM 2 was much better tactical game, you had more or less but unique castles with their strengths and weaknesses, HoMM 4 is more complex than any of previous in the series, but slow to play in multiplayer.

 

[Fowyr]

Yup, I remember seeing NES version of M&M2. Dumbfucks even removed engaged/not engaged status, making joke of some pretty neat and tactical spells like fireball.

 

[octavius]

Because it's a great game??

Its most casual in the series, HoMM 2 was much better tactical game, you had more or less but unique castles with their strengths and weaknesses, HoMM 4 is more complex than any of previous in the series, but slow to play in multiplayer.

Yes, HoMM 2's factions were more unique. I especially like to use Knight troops led by Crusaders against the Undead, for example.
But overall HoMM 3 is superior, with more options, much better AI (especially the combat AI which was braindead in HoMM 2), and the Quest system.
But I still love HoMM 2; after all I've played more than 50 user made maps the last year.

EDIT: HoMM 2 may be a better strategic game due to the the things you mentioned, but tactically HoMM 3 is clearly superior.

 

[Watser]

Bard's Tale - the ridiculous amount of combat is disgusting.

Playing BT1 myself right now, beforehand I have seen this comment a lot and was fearing I would eventually give up due to encounters every couple of steps.
My experience is completely different though, the rate of random encounters is bearable and I stumble upon more fixed encounters than random from going trough doors. Even then I am able to just run from the encounter and carry on my merry business 90% of the time.
I am just about to enter Kylearan's Tower so it may be different from this point on as I am nearing the end of the game.

I broke my old RPG cherry with Might and Magic 1 back in 2012 when Grid Cartographer ver. 2 was out, I figured this was the perfect time to try some of the old blobbers as I couldn't be bothered with graph paper and excel seemed way too troublesome. Suffice to say M&M I is still the game I have had the most fun with of the old games I have played since then and I consider it the best in the I-V line.

 

[Jason Liang]

Instead of playing the original pre-VGA versions of some of these RPGs, you might try the console remakes of-
Pool of Radiance (NES)- but you wont be able to import if you plan on playing through to Pools of Darkness

Why the hell would you play a dumbed down, censored version?

Where is the NES version censored or dumbed down?

According to Mobygames:

The NES version was substantially different from other versions. It removed references to the Adventure's Journal and some of the more complex features of the computer versions, like different currency units. Battles were significantly reduced in size, the graphics were overhauled and redesigned so that the game could be controlled with a control pad, and music was written for it. A randomly generated dungeon feature was also removed.

And the US branch of Nintendo was notorious for its draconian censorship, making Disney look positively liberal in comparison.

I couldn't tell any difference between the NES and PC version encounters. The type and number of enemies are exactly the same. I also don't remember random dungeons in the PC version.

 

[Jacob]

Might & Magic World of Xeen is genuinely fun, and very user-friendly. And unlike Dungeon Master and all its followers, this one is pure turn-based with 6 characters.

 

[octavius]

Might & Magic World of Xeen is genuinely fun, and very user-friendly. And unlike Dungeon Master and all its followers, this one is pure turn-based with 6 characters.

But it's so simplistic that it could just as well be real time. What's the point in turn based if there's no tactics?

 

[Sigourn]

Oh, have you seen my list? Check first part of it. Al of these games are really enjoyable and very diverse in their subgenres.
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/list-of-the-must-play-games.55367/

Bloodnet
Legacy: Realm of Terror
Nahlakh
Aleshar

- The Lords of Midnight
- All the Gold Box games, and especially FRUA with DnD module conversions
- Knights of Xentar.

Al Qadim
The Summoning
Tunnels & Trolls: Crusaders of Khazan.

Thanks! All the other games you guys mentioned are in my "to play" list.

I have a few comments about these ones left, so maybe you could clear them up:

- I don't like roguelikes for the following reason: I don't enjoy ASCII art as I'm looking for immersive experiences, and I don't particularly find the basic gameplay of Rogue interesting, as it seems fairly repetitive and boring (no matter how random each playthrough may be). Is there any roguelike that feels much more like a traditional RPG? It should be something tile based, with a story that's more than "find the item at the end of the dungeon and bring it back", NPCs to talk to and quests to do. Maybe I'm asking for too much. I thought Dungeons of Dredmor looked good, but I'm afraid it's just another Rogue in disguise.
- If I'm focused on a more stats-driven, progressively getting stronger RPG, which games of the mentioned above should I avoid?
- I don't care about Buck Rogers, should I play those Gold Box games anyways assuming I find the gameplay fun? What about Spelljammer? I've heard it's fairly shit.

Also, if you could point out "roguelikes" from the list I linked to, that would be helpful. There were a few that "looked" like traditional tile-based roguelikes, but since they had party management and more "complicated" stats, I thought they were a different type of game altogether, more like Final Fantasy (it's the only similar franchise I know with that kind of aesthetic). Dark Disciples comes to mind.

I'm honestly looking for cRPGs that offer something fun in terms of mechanics, or a "very interesting" story (so far, everything I had played was "destroy the very evil dude"), or that at the very least looks good (Wizardry isn't exactly groundbreaking, but there are games that try to do so much in terms of graphics they end up looking like crap, like Odyssey). In other words: it has to have a reedeming quality that's worth playing it.

- Regarding my list, is it worth it to play the Questron and Phantasie series?
- Which ones are definitely a "not worth your time in any way or form"? We know Skyrim is pretty bashed here, I even think it is a terrible RPG, but otherwise is a fun, time-consuming experience.
- What are the best Wizardry franchise ports? I want something that leaves the gameplay and difficulty as intact as possible, but that looks better or at least makes the controls less clunky.
- Oh, and definitely suggest anything post 1990 that is worth my time, keeping in mind all those things I mentioned.

Thanks for all your help!

 

[Watser]

Might & Magic World of Xeen is genuinely fun, and very user-friendly. And unlike Dungeon Master and all its followers, this one is pure turn-based with 6 characters.

I don't get the praise for this game. Sure, I enjoyed it as well but most of the time it is just so boring and so very easy.