Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Which of the following classic RPG series is the best?

Which series of the best?

  • Might&Magic

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Final Fantasy

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Dragon Quest

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ultima

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Wizardry

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Total voters
    2

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,302
Location
Ingrija
commie said:
after the SSI Gold Box games it was like something from another world with that vibrant palette and all round slickness(WTF mouse support?). :)

Traitor.

As if most GB games didn't have mouse support by 1991. They even had a joystick support FFS.

Oh, and this thread is very gay, move over to the new "megaseries" one.
 

kmonster

Augur
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
316
Might and Magic. No doubt. Most real content and best balance and you can actually feel that they were made to for playing and not for marketing.

The first wizardry games are just dungeon crawlers where mainly your patience to farm enough XP before going to the next level is tested.
Part 6 and 7 had an interesting spell system and more than a dungeon to discover, but the main skill tested are luck manipulation by rerolling or reloading (they're badly balanced), XP farming and patience to waste your time. It increases the total game playing time but doesn't make a game better if you have to watch your party resting for 30 minutes real time to get their mana back or do other repetitive stuff or if riddles are so illogical that you need a fortune teller to solve them. Many things like the so called different W7 endings are just marketing fake (instead of letting you reload when you're screwed it's called "ending" and saved, there's only one real disappointing ending with disappointing end sequence ("you haven't really finished, buy W8").
Hardly any content remains when you remove the artificial lengthening, it's a myth that those games are big, they're just slow.
Wiz6+7 were considered difficult because they required luck manipulation by reloading, MM3 was considered difficult because it required using your brain.
Part 8 might be the best Wizardry game, but it has slow combat and level scaling.

The Ultimas I tried are just too painful to play, maybe the later rpgs are nice if you want to play "The Sims" and your computer isn't fast enough. Being able to bake bread and having to talk about the weather with many NPCs might be essential for marketing, but not for the game playing fun. The supposedly best U4 has a educator attitude which disqualifies it as rpg. You may not choose your class, WE judge what class you have to play, it's not about playing your role, it's about playing how WE want you to, WE judge if you play correctly and don't let you proceed if you don't, your parents told us to do so. That seems to be the attitude behind the later Ultima games too. Avatar, make your mummy proud by behaving well.

The Might and Magic games (at least part 1-7 which I played) on the other hand show that they were made to please the player and not only to make money. Compared to the other series they're extremely fair and balanced and offer more real content instead of time wasters.

The first part had bad graphics for it's time, but the gameplay was fine. Instead of a simple dungeon crawl it offered a world to explore and I loved the ending.
MM2 has nice graphics and a very big world.
MM3-5 made a great step forward. Intuitive to play but hard to master. Great automap and huge worlds to explore. Gameplay was optimized so you'd be able to explore big areas fast. Fully turn based so you can take your time thinking, but still feels real.
MM6 had a great skill and spell system. You could choose between the still great turn based combat or real time action. Although it's fast paced it takes a long time to complete because the world is extremely huge.
MM7 optimized the skill and spell system even further. Its shorter than MM6 but stil a big game.

While I wouldn't dare to torture anyone today with classic Wizardry or Ultima games, the MM games are still fun to play today.
 

commie

The Last Marxist
Patron
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,865,249
Location
Where one can weep in peace
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Divinity: Original Sin 2
mondblut said:
commie said:
after the SSI Gold Box games it was like something from another world with that vibrant palette and all round slickness(WTF mouse support?). :)

Traitor.

As if most GB games didn't have mouse support by 1991. They even had a joystick support FFS.

Oh, and this thread is very gay, move over to the new "megaseries" one.

I never used mouse support in GB games. I had a trackball with my XT, but funnily enough, it seemed clunky to use a mouse compared to the KB.

I'm not a traitor the GB games, they are still great, the extra tactical options by having the combat switch to a grid makes them better at this than Wiz/M&M which often became a kind of puzzle in which character should do what and when.

What I meant was the presentation, the 'huge' viewing are, the colors, the slickness of the icons etc. it made M&M seem like something totally distinct from the old. Different kind of game to the GB ones and that's why it's not fair to compare them.


Also what kmonster said about M&M. Doesn't say much, but when he does... :love:
 

tennishero

Novice
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
404
the lack of elder scrolls is disturbing

also mass effect

sure its a fucking mess, shooter with tacked on rpg elements which fail- and where the fuck are the NPCs and the town hub?

but with all those problems its still better than arcanum, witcher, baldurs gate, gothic
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Ultima is a mixed bag, IMO, but it's worth a try. Wizardry is hard as fuck but it's entertaining. Oh wait larpingdude17 lol
 

Topher

Cipher
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
1,860
I've really been meaning to try out the M&M games. I played a bit of the Wizardry series and it seemed decent but I didn't want to get to into them at the time and I've never played any of the Ultima games.
 

RatFink

Educated
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
596
because mm4+5 didn want to install on my machine and i was lazy i just started mm6.

damn...i havnt been hooked like that since...well..the last good game which mustve been some time ago.

but at the moment im running from dungeons to village and back...but it doesnt fuckin get old :salute:
damn if i wouldnt have to write shit for university i would lock my door and forget the outside world.

if anyone would know where to get the manual i would be very happy.
couldnt find it myself :oops:

might also have ruined my knight already :smug:
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom