Per counts down his favourite games

Ratty said:
Diablo and Midtown Madness above Fallout?

I wish plague and pestilence upon you and your kin.
Click to expand...

I have trouble believing he likes Diablo more than Fallout. Sure maybe as an addictive level treadmill Diablo owns Fallout, but I also figured Per to prefer a deep story to a fun level grind any day...

I guess he can justify putting Diablo there, but only if he's the type of gamer I guessed he wasnt which is strange...

If this continues I can only guess #1 is Oblivion.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
Meh, you have no idea of the criteria Per is using so it's impossible to criticize him. I thoroughly enjoyed Diablo, the Warlords series and Fallout and while my order might differ from his, there are many criteria I could think of that would put Diablo ahead of Fallout.

Also, while I like Diablo's setting more than Diablo 2, I think Diablo 2 lent itself better to a multiplayer environment and more importantly... it had the ability to run.
 
I can see there are some people who won't be able to sleep properly unless I posted a list that looked like this:

1. Fallout
2. None
3. None
4. Fallout demo
5. None
6. None
7. None
8. None
9. Fallout 2
10. None

However, this is MY thread, MY list, and it didn't come true. So I'm taking it back. I'm taking them all back!

6, MP: Formula One Grand Prix (Amiga)

In the early 90s this game (apparently known as World Circuit in the US) pretty much revolutionized racing. In chase-cam car games, you had typically been looking at a couple of convergent lines that represented the road, with your car or motorbike or whatever sitting like a blob in the middle. The lines would bend to represent a curve, and you'd simply steer in that direction, skidding towards the other side until you had passed the curve, and just possibly having to not accelerate for a few moments. Basically, computer driving was nothing at all like real-world driving. F1GP changed that with its 3D environment; suddenly the best way of taking a curve was the same as in the real world. You were also racing on models of real-world tracks, driving (if you so desired) a real-world number of laps, necessitating real-world pit stops, and accumulating real-world points during real-world seasons invoking the wrath of real-world ninjas! Er. Anyway, this was pretty excellent as a single player game (and was even considered for that list), but as always, the multiplayer option would add another dimension of competitive fun. You didn't have a split screen, though; instead everyone took turns, five minutes at a time, with the computer controlling everyone else. It worked well enough. Although it was perhaps not realistic that you could nudge other cars into wild spins and mass crashes with no repercussions.

6, SP: Pirates! (C64, Amiga)

The first game to carry the "Sid Meier's" tag was also pretty darn great. It seamlessly blended a number of ingredients: part sandbox, part simulation, part personal quest, everything well thought out and presented. Recruit a rowdy crew. Run down merchantmen and take their stuff. Fire cannons. Defeat evil spaniards with villainous moustaches, then keep hitting them with your sword after they yield. Accumulate a fleet. Curse the prevailing winds. Dig up treasure. Conquer cities. Aside from the lack of parrots and penguins, there wasn't much that was wrong with Pirates! (and we're talking about a game designed for 8-bit computers; those typically had a good deal of wrong in them). One let-down is perhaps that there was no true climax to your career, no supreme achievement or finish line, you just kind of ran out of stuff to do and was eventually forced to retire. But getting there still meant crafting your own piracy epic.
 
How does the original pirates compare to the remake? I played the remake and enjoyed it for some time but began to find it rather monotonous after about a month and won't ever touch it again.
 
the remake was crap compared to the original. both "Pirates!" and "Pirates? Gold!" owned it hands down.
 
*disagrees with SuAside for the hell of it*

I considered the remake to be superior to the original and the Gold release, if only because it got rid of the annoying sun-sighting mini-game (present in the original) and added simplistic, yet very entertaining turn-based land battles. Vastly improved visuals are a no-brainer, and there are a few new gameplay elements that make the game fresh and interesting even if you played the original to the death.

As far as I'm concerned, the remake compares unfavorably to its predecessors in only two respects: 1) no more ship vs. fort battles, and 2) it's *way* too easy on all difficulty levels but Swashbuckler.

I could complain about monotony that inevitably sets in once you've done everything there is to do in the game, but the predecessors are even worse in that regard (since there are no villains to defeat, no family members to rescue and overall less gameplay elements to keep you entertained).

Don't get me wrong, both Pirates! and Pirates! Gold are still very playable (that I regularly replayed Pirates! 1987 until late 2004 should tell you something), but ever since I played the remake they hold almost no appeal for me.
 
well, Gold had land 'battles' too (although extremely simplistic, both in tactics and graphics), can't remember for the original though. more than actual battles, it was more 'get your men into town alive'.

as for your point for the graphics being better in the remake, of course that's true but i feel like they've lost some of the original gameplay. Pirates! was simplistic and fun. it didn't take long at all to get the game well in hand. the last remake really added gameplay elements that to me were nothing but annoying.

also the first two had a real feeling and ambiance of freedom and prospects. in the last remake, i felt no thrill, no prospects to work towards, no urge to think greater.
 
Per said:
8, SP: Warlords II Deluxe (PC)
Click to expand...
I am not surprised, I am disappointed, because of why, cause I can't see how this game has a thing to give more than the most have, most play game of the genre, the MoM, Master of Magic. And by the way, don't fear, you can win MoM, even completely with out magic. :twisted:

The_Vault_Dweller said:
Now I have another game to add to my list of "Games I would have loved had I been around at the time to get them."
Click to expand...
Edit:No way, BAD JARNO. -Sander
If that was bad, then this is even worse. Yes, Jarno, that was even worse. So now you get a temp-ban for a week.
 
Ratty said:
the predecessors are even worse in that regard (since there are no villains to defeat, no family members to rescue
Click to expand...

The original Pirates! had family members and villains (if you mean the evil renegades you fight when courting a governor's daughter or searching for news of relatives).

Jarno Mikkola said:
I am not surprised, I am disappointed, because of why, cause I can't see how this game has a thing to give more than the most have, most play game of the genre, the MoM, Master of Magic.
Click to expand...

I haven't played MoM. Such are the vagaries of the spider simian evil etc. I will take that as a strong recommendation.

5, MP: Lotus Turbo Challenge 2 (Amiga)

Magnetic Fields, the developer responsible for Super Cars II, also put together this 8-stage driving game. You could play it on your own, which was good enough. Or you could play it with someone else, which was better. Or you could have your own little LAN party, connecting your Amiga to another using a null modem and selecting the four-player option. Needless to say, this is where things got pretty awesome. Even though we're talking about the converging lines/skidding in curves type of driving game, there was a sense of speed and control which was quite remarkable at the time. In Lotus III they added essentially infinite stages, but at the same time they lost that special feeling, so there was no particular reason to play it. Oh well.

5, SP: Baldur's Gate (PC)

There I was in 99 or something, thinking nothing important had happened with computer RPGs since, well, Eye of the Beholder II, Pools of Darkness and Realms of Arkania. Suddenly I was introduced to Baldur's Gate, and it was immediately clear there had been a generation shift while I wasn't looking; the graphics, presentation and level of detail were far beyond anything I'd seen before. You mean maps are these pre-rendered isometric forests and mountains with trees and streams and cliffs? You mean I can watch my avatars do stuff and change appearance and colour depending on clothes and equipment? You mean there's no division between movement and combat interfaces? You mean there are little animated gibberlings that squeal as they slash at me? You mean there are spell effects and gems and dialogues and in-jokes and books with little stories? I'll take it, please. I'm quite impressed with how they nailed the flavour of the Forgotten Realms; also the game feels huge, the plot isn't as dumb as some other plots ("defeat the evil fighter" as opposed to "defeat the evil wizard", wooo), and there's the whole character progression deal, suboptimal as AD&D may be. A lasting, immersive fantasy experience and a well-deserved success. A pity the Tales of the Sword Coast expansion was lame.
 
Do you masturbate to racing games Per? :)

No just kidding. I simply havent heard of a racing game recommended in so long...or perhaps I dont really know any particular fans of the genre. You dont have like a collection of real life classic/hotrod/modified vehicles do you? I also thought you could be a reclusive millionaire type...

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
....
Baldur's Gate a better game than Falllout? Baldur's Gate was a really, really boring and overly long game that only got better once you actually got to Baldur's Gate.


Also, Jarno, week-long temp-ban for purposely ignoring the rule not to provide people with warez twice in a row while being told in the mean time not to do it. Think before you do something next time.
 
Baldur's Gate? Fuck, this calls for heavy artillery.

*starts throwing frag grenades at Per*
 
Sander said:
Baldur's Gate a better game than Falllout?
Click to expand...

You mean as in, "objectively"?

Sander said:
Baldur's Gate was a really, really boring
Click to expand...

You mean as in, "subjectively"?

Sander said:
and overly long
Click to expand...

Because even if you love it, you'll want it to be over pretty fast?

4, MP: Last Bronx (PC)

We now leave the racing games behind, in favour of a late-90s console conversion of a beat-'em-up I expect is somewhat obscure. I don't take easily to beat-'em-ups, having never understood the point of Street Fighter II or Mortal Kombat or Tekken 36 or whatever. What I like about this one is that it doesn't feel flat or cartoonish, but has a palpable arcade flavour. You have your eight distinctly different but well balanced fighters with their standard and special moves, you grab your gamepads and battle it out, the best game mode being the one where each player selects five characters and whoever doesn't run out of characters wins. I'd prefer if you didn't have to memorize and execute insane button combos on the gamepad to perform some of the individual moves, especially when they aren't even correspondingly more powerful, and I'll never understand the use of stupid random Engrish in Japanese titles. But overall, brutal bashing goodness with an absence of fireball silliness.

4, SP: Wasteland (C64, PC)

Need I introduce the game that everyone plays CONSTANTLY? Wasteland shows how darn right things go when PnP RPG design meets flawless computer game design. No 3D graphics. No little animated gibberlings that squeal as they slash at you. Just a low-res portrait of one of your foes, and the assurance that your 36 points of damage just made it explode in a shower of wheels and sprockets, or ground round as the case might be. "A silvery mountain of reptilian terror cocks its head, studies you for a moment, then attacks!" Those words put a more perfect image in my mind than any first-person polygon view. The design and interface were leagues ahead of anything that existed at the time, including that fantasy cousin The Bard's Tale. Oh, and the pervasive dark humour, the unforgettable scenario and sidetracks - but don't let me keep you, go back to playing Wasteland right now.
 
Per said:
You mean as in, "objectively"?
Click to expand...
Objectively, there's no way BG is better. In any way.

Per said:
You mean as in, "subjectively"?
Click to expand...
And objectively. All the quests consisted of FedEx or 'go kill' quests. There were no choices of meaning, the combat system was objectively pretty shitty (and subjectively at most 'chaotically fun', although I suppose the gimmick factor of screaming gibberlings helped), the story was somewhat decent and the pacing of the game was ludicrously slow.

Per said:
Because even if you love it, you'll want it to be over pretty fast?
Click to expand...
No, because Black Isle dragged very little content out over a very long span of time.


Per said:
4, SP: Wasteland (C64, PC)

Need I introduce the game that everyone plays CONSTANTLY? Wasteland shows how darn right things go when PnP RPG design meets flawless computer game design. No 3D graphics. No little animated gibberlings that squeal as they slash at you. Just a low-res portrait of one of your foes, and the assurance that your 36 points of damage just made it explode in a shower of wheels and sprockets, or ground round as the case might be. "A silvery mountain of reptilian terror cocks its head, studies you for a moment, then attacks!" Those words put a more perfect image in my mind than any first-person polygon view. The design and interface were leagues ahead of anything that existed at the time, including that fantasy cousin The Bard's Tale. Oh, and the pervasive dark humour, the unforgettable scenario and sidetracks - but don't let me keep you, go back to playing Wasteland right now.
Click to expand...
Crap, still need to go play it for the first time.
 
Sander said:
No, because Black Isle dragged very little content out over a very long span of time.
Click to expand...

Yip, overly contentless would be a more fitting term than overly long.

I managed to finish Baldur's Gate once. The mere thought of doing it again makes my brains cringe with the thought of a thousand agonised hours of boredome.

Also, Wasteland is not better than Fallout. Sorry, man, as much as the oldschool snob in me would love to agree with you, Wasteland was a brilliant game, but not as brilliant as Fallout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top