I'm tired of pretending these were bad. These were the GOAT.
>playing clunky dos games
>>3839336Not an argument.
>>3839335Some of those games like Eye of the Beholder, I played as a kid. Therefore they're amazing games that are criminally underrated. People need to look past the early 90s graphics and see the amazing experience that's underneath.Some of them I never got to play, like Treasures of the Savage Frontier. Therefore that game sucks, it's too dated to be enjoyed by modern audiences and is best forgotten to time.
>>3839335Pool of Radiance played a very important role in improving combat in computer RPGs, but it's overrated, especially with people glazing it for it's NPC interactions which were rather a spoof - sure, you've had different tones of talk, but I fail to remember how they led to different outcomes. It also had balance issues, like the tedious temple battle with like 2 dozen of orcs - it wasn't fun nor startegic, just a test of patience of failing THAC0 checks. Also the level design were pretty mid apart from the pyramid and the final maze.Wizardry 5 released only a year after, yet it has much more fleshed out NPC interactions and consistently great level design, as well as simpler, but well-balanced combat.
>>3839336
>>3839335Some are very good and also near universally highly regarded, some are very, very bad.
>>3839335>first-person>real-time>party-basedselecting what spells to cast between multiple characters was a nightmare
>>3839440Eye of the Beholder 1 combat was as barebones and simpleton as it could possible be. Or is you talking about some other game from the list?
>>3839440BITCHMADE
>>3839418Combat was more involved and deeper in Pool of Radiance than Wizardry 5, along with a much better story, better interface, better exploration, and better art. There's a reason that Pool of Radiance blew Wiz 5 out of the fucking water on its own platform back then.
>>3839335>Gold BoxThese games were great for the time but the UI and systems are awkward and annoying to use. Hard to recommend today.>Eye of the Beholder 1+2Great real time Dungeon Crawlers even if mapping D&D rules onto the Dungeon Master formula is kind of weird.Never played any of the others.
>>3839420Even the font gets on my nerves.
Blood and Magic is an incredibly good time, even though the micromanagement gets to you. I'm not sure if I've ever beaten it. It got quite hard for twelve year old me in the later campaigns.
>>3839858Thanks for revealing your power level. Eye of the Beholder was the most basic-bitch of all the gold box games, deliberately made so even retards could understand how to play a blobber.
>>3839335I will talk about them with you if you have a topicdon't want to argue good and bad on 4chan
>>3839906>don't want to argue good and bad on 4chanHoly based.
>>3839849>much better story, better interface, better exploration, better artAlmost all wrong. The story in Wizardry 5 was nigh philosophical near the end, with metaphors about good and evil and sly riddle verses. PoR story is just dragon bad, he corrupted people, kill dragon, becum hero, there were zero depth to it. It's as barebones as sword and sorcery story could possibly be. I remember there being some well-respected but corrupted dude who held slaves, and lizardmen racism struggle, but that's about it. Wizardry 5 level design was miles ahead of PoR. The levels were big and witty, an obvious improvement over previous installments. Mayhaps you confuse it with older Wizardry games? As of interface, I find Wiz 5 way simpler and laconic, although both were fine. And about art... you have to be joking, right? Even if we compare dos versions of these games they're about the same level, except that Wiz 5 still had wireframe dungeons (which is no fucking wonder considering how big these dungeons were compared to PoR) and the monster graphics are more raunchy, and it's CGA. It focused on substance, not the looks.Being an official DnD product and combat is the only thing that made PoR stand out among other games. If not for it, you wouldn't be talking about it now.
>>3839335Menzobarranzan was horrible but I agree that many of these are genuinely good especially for the time period
>>3839335What exactly is well made here
>>3839913>The story in Wizardry 5 was nigh philosophical near the endWiz 5 does NOT have a "better" story you pretentious ass-hat clown. It has a thinly veiled sketch of a plot that is directed at giving the player a premise to work with. That's about it. You might come across some good characters here and there, but the actual plot of the story itself is dogshit, like most Wizardry's up until Wizardry 7. PoR has an actual story, that has plot twists, chapter-like structure, and is structured like an actual adventure with a clear progression built into the narrative.>graphicsThey were big fuck-huge wireframe dungeons, per your own admittance you faggot shitlord. Even if we compare it to the SNES version, a whopping 4 years after PoR, PoR still comes out ahead, where you had bit-crushed drawings compared to art that was actually made in-engine with the limitations kept in mind of the hardware, leading to less scraped-up looking sprites.>the levels were big and witty - exploration/level designMmmm, boy oh boy do I love seeing the same four walls over and over again! Meanwhile in PoR you had a variety of screens to look at which kept things varied, while also giving you a greater sense of place. Just out-right objectively better. You had the first person segments, the overland segments, and the tactical overview segments. Not even a fucking comparison. Oh, but sure, you occasionally ventured back to town, but that's about it. Which is also why the "dungeons" were so huge in Wiz 5, that's basically all there fucking was. > and the monster graphics are more raunchy, and it's CGA. It focused on substance, not the looks.I don't think you know what the term "raunchy" means. Also, funny you say it was focused more on "substance" than on "looks". The art in PoR had more substance as well, since you got to look at more than just rough neon pink and teal versions of creatures you encountered, you actually saw story segments and travel.God you are retarded.
>>3839919Compared to other Gold Box titles, yes. As a general CRPG? It was fine. Above serviceable, below good.
>>3839335> I'm tired of pretending these were badDon’t care and you probably never did. You just like buzzwords.>These were the GOAT.No. But I enjoyed them well over a quarter of a century ago.Can’t you just find something interesting about one of them and then post and discuss that in a thread. Why reduce everything to this level of shit?
>>3840034>buzzwordsWouldn't it be a catch phrase?
>>3840010>It has a thinly veiled sketch of a plot that is directed at giving the player a premise to work with. I admit that I might overestimated the general story by cherrypicking the best from memory, like The Loon and elemental riddles. Nevertheless, these small bits have better writing than anything in PoR, and the fact that you still insist that it had decent plot with "twists" is very funny, all of them were as obvious as if it's a children's book except for the human Tyranthraxus not being real one.>like most Wizardry's up until Wizardry 7You never played 6 it seems.>Even if we compare it to the SNES version, a whopping 4 years after PoR, PoR still comes out aheadYou have a vision disability or shit taste. Sole piece of Jun Suemi's art alone destroys every bit of PoR's visuals. And by the way, those were in 1990's PC-98 release as well. Needless to say, visuals is 1990's Amiga version of PoR barely been improved, I know that because it was the one I played.>Mmmm, boy oh boy do I love seeing the same four walls over and over again!Either complete retard or bait, no comments there. All PoR levels save for pyramid, Tyrnathraxus maze, and maybe graveyard were utter brainless garbage, even then they all combined held no candle to Manfretti's theatre. >Just out-right objectively better.Try using your left brain hemisphere instead of right to judge game's level design. This is as retarded as if you'd say that System Shock 2 level design is better than SS1 because it has more decorative assets and smoother details.>occasionallyMore like all the fucking time. This alone proves that your memory about the game is rather muddy and you barely know what you're talking about.>Also, funny you say it was focused more on "substance" than on "looks".I've meant the game itself, not the graphics. And I were right. PoR instead were showing off but underneath the game was shallow.>God you are retarded.No u, nostalgia-blinded fanboy.
>>3839913>The story in Wizardry 5 was nigh philosophical near the end, with metaphors about good and evil and sly riddle verses. PoR story is just dragon badmidwit detected
>>3840010>>3840085Samefag.
>>3839440>how can i navigate this menu? it's so old>builds burj khalifa in fortnite in 3.42 seconds
>>3839335I bet you haven't even played them. Certainly not all of them. You just like looking at the covers and imagining a great game based on them.
>>3839894Eye of the Beholder is not a gold box game at all, stupid fucking zoomer.
>>3839335Dungeon Hack was awesomeI remember Pool of Radiance being awesome too.
>>3840079>Nevertheless, these small bits have better writing than anything in PoR, and the fact that you still insist that it had decent plot with "twists" is very funny, all of them were as obvious as if it's a children's book except for the human Tyranthraxus not being real one.No, they don't have better writing. Quite frankly, you chose the best examples, all of which are not particularly deep or compelling. You only say it's "children's book tier" because you have no actual legitimate criticisms of them other than vague allusions to know what the fuck happens in it and how it develops in-game. I'm not stupid enough to proclaim it as some grand philosophical odyssey, but almost no games were back then, other than text adventures.>You never played 6 it seems.6's story is better than 5, but it's still not a compelling reason to play the game. Pool of Radiance had a compelling enough story that drove you to finish it.>You have a vision disability or shit taste. Sole piece of Jun Suemi's art alone destroys every bit of PoR's visuals. And by the way, those were in 1990's PC-98 release as well. That is not from the PC-98 version, you retard, lmao, congrats on outing yourself as not having played any of the fucking games. Those are from the Wizardry Llylgamyn Saga release in 1998, which had completely redone dungeon interiors. The dungeons in the PC-98 version were wireframe, dipshit. So again, overall, Pool of Radiance, YES, has better total graphics in comparison.>Either complete retard or bait, no comments there. All PoR levels save for pyramid, Tyrnathraxus maze, and maybe graveyard were utter brainless garbage, even then they all combined held no candle to Manfretti's theatre.Yea, no comments there because you know I'm right and the only criticism you have is generic, vague, faggot-retard nonsense that holds no merit or substance.I think we can summarize the rest of you retarded post as "didn't play either game".
>>3842006Llylgamyn balls.
>>3842006You're correct that it's not the PC-98 version, but incorrect that it's the Llylgamyn Saga release. It's from the SNES version, which is still 6 years ahead of Pool of Radiance. Goldbox games stopped being produced by around 1992, which, by that time, the engine was outdated, even though the art was still pretty nice.
>>3840160I've played Eye of the Beholder, Pool of Radiance, and Hillsfar. You just sound like a projecting zoomer.
>>3839335I've finished the Eye of the Beholder trilogy, either on the OGs or as total modules in Legend of Grimrock, some of them I've beaten more than once or in both. I can't remember which is which. It was alright, I had fun doing it but nothing to scream about.
Who says otherwise?You want turn based dnd goodness, goldbox is your only choice. TOEE comes close but has god awful encounter design.And why are people comparing a drpg to a crpg?
>>3842006>That is not from the PC-98 version, you retard, lmao, congrats on outing yourself as not having played any of the fucking games.You are an illiterate retard, I never said a fucking word about dungeons not being wireframe in PC-98 release, and I have no idea how you could confuse Llylgamyn Saga with picrel - you truly are blind. I was talking about first appearance of Jun Suemi's art in Wizardry 5. They were in PC-98 release. The fucking picrel shows a 1990's PC-98 release. Amiga's 1990 release of PoR looks just like dos version save for slightly improved portraits. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9vlDTerdNc>Yea, no comments there because you know I'm right and the only criticism you have is generic, vague, faggot-retard nonsense that holds no merit or substance.You are braindead. Play Wizardry, then talk about it. I played both, that's how I know Wizardry 5 is an infinitely better game when it comes to level design, puzzles, and NPC interactions.>I think we can summarize the rest of you retarded post as "didn't play either game".I think we can summarize that you are a troll. A good one though, I really fell for it the first time.
>>3842011Are you fucking blind too? I pinpointed SPECIFIC part of picrel that is PC-98 release. I posted pictures of the SNES relase because it were the one we were originally talking about to show that retard how it fucking looks like, because it seemed to me that he never played it.
>>3842121>You are an illiterate retard, I never said a fucking word about dungeons not being wireframe in PC-98 release,Sorry, you were so fuck-stupid shit-tarded that you were implying that those dogshit wireframe dungeons were better than PoR, because some japs artifacted and space-fillered sprites dumped onto the PC-98 were somehow superior, lmao. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were less stupid in thinking the SNES version was the PC-98 release, but holy fuck, you're actually a whole tier more stupid than I previously thought, so congrats on that dumbfuck.>Play Wizardry, then talk about it. I played both, that's how I know Wizardry 5 is an infinitely better game when it comes to level design, puzzles, and NPC interactions.>Oh look, a wireframe dungeon!>Oh look, some more wireframe dungeon!>also, that map, lmaoHere's a map of Pool of Radiance. Needless to say, it takes a big fat dumb donkey shit all over that pathetic mess of lines. I don't even need to argue with you, everyone else ITT will already be able to see its superiority over Wizardry 5.Either way, it got better reviews and better sales, so historically, it's already better, suck my chode faggot.>I think we can summarize that you are a troll. A good one though, I really fell for it the first time.No, I was trying to interpret your post beyond being a fuck-stupid-inbred retard, but apparently, you ARE that fucking stupid. What a shame.>>3842123Yea, you have shit organizational skills, it's no wonder other people fucked up and misinterpreted your post, lmao.
>>3842227>"here's a map of por">shows an overhead world map and artistic isometric depiction of city of Phlan that doesn't have anything to do with what those levels actually areNow I know for sure that you're either a troll or very desperate to win in a failed argument. Seems like you also ignored my advice of using your left hemisphere more often, 'tis a pity.Here is the actual map from PoR, with arguably it's most complex level - the wizard's pyramid. Needless to say, it looks like absolute shit compared to Wizardry 5's first level. Maybe even compared to Wiz 1's first level I must say. Hell, even the rather big final maze is nothing but a plain damn maze - no traps, no spinners, no anti magic grids, no dark spots, just few teleporters here and there. Any amateur Wizardry player would map that garbage in no time.>it got better reviews and better sales, so historically, it's already better, suck my chode faggot.Ultima Underworld 1 & 2 and System Shock 1 & 2 together sold less than Doom, and were received rather phlegmatic by normies as said games were too cerebral for them. Are you implying that Doom is a better game?>you have shit organizational skills, it's no wonder other people fucked up and misinterpreted your postI put the PC 98 image in the lower corner and marked it with a red fucking text, even putting "v" pointing at it. Your extremely poor attention to detail and vision disability is not my problem, but I expected no less from someone who unironically thinks that PoR has better levels than Wizardry. The fact that you mistook SNES for PS1 despite realizing I were posting SNES snapshots beforehand is beyond funny.>>3842070>And why are people comparing a drpg to a crpg?Wizardry 5 has no less right of being called a CRPG than PoR. I have compared them because both of them released in the same year, and because Wizardry 5 did NPC interactions much better, which was something PoR were collectively praised for. Read the early posts.
>>3839335This is such a stupid meme, why would you ever pretend something you like is bad?
>>3842253>System Shock 1 & 2 together sold less than Doom, and were received rather phlegmatic by normies as said games were too cerebral for them. Are you implying that Doom is a better game?Nah.
>>3842367Then what was your point, unless you're NTA?
>>3842253>U-U-U-UR A TROLLAhhh, the last bastion of defense for a failed argument.>Here is the actual map from PoR, with arguably it's most complex level - the wizard's pyramid. Needless to say, it looks like absolute shit compared to Wizardry 5's first level. Maybe even compared to Wiz 1's first level I must say. Hell, even the rather big final maze is nothing but a plain damn maze - no traps, no spinners, no anti magic grids, no dark spots, just few teleporters here and there. Any amateur Wizardry player would map that garbage in no time.Again, congrats on not having played the game. The maps I posted came with the boxed edition for the game dumb fuck.The two maps are the overworld, which you can explore manually, and the other ones are the zoomed-in city areas. Holy fucking shit you are stupid and pedantic.>no traps>no spinners>no anti-magic grids>no dark spotsHoly shit, even more evidence you never played the game, since there is a class dedicated to finding and disarming traps, the Thief. You can encounter things like pit traps, poison needle traps on chests, explosive runes, dart launchers, and collapsing ceilings. Besides, having tiles that spin you around and tiles that make it dark is not "good level map design". Map design is about how things flow, the pacing and positioning of encounters, the inventiveness of scenarios, and so on, all of which is more varied in PoR.>I put the PC 98 image in the lower corner and marked it with a red fucking text, even putting "v" pointing at it. Your extremely poor attention to detail and vision disability is not my problem, but I expected no less from someone who unironically thinks that PoR has better levels than Wizardry.Ironic, coming from the dipshit who didn't even know there were traps in a game he supposedly claimed to have played, lmao.>Read the early postsI did, and they were faggot shit.
>>3842757>YOU NEVER PLAYED THE GAM-ACK!Here's my ADF save disk image. Go check it in WinUAE.Granted, my playthrough is not completionist as no quest directed me to the silver dragon caves and I missed out on that one.https://files.catbox.moe/k1icsw.adf>The two maps are the overworld, which you can explore manuallyThose are not actual levels. It's a fucking overworld map, and an overworld map is not a level - all it does is serving as an entrance to actual levels and giving you a random encounter or two, and an artistic depiction of Phlan that doesn't show what Phlan maps actually fucking are. At this point you begin showing yourself that you haven't played shit, even relating to the game you defending.>You can encounter things like pit traps, poison needle traps on chests, explosive runes, dart launchers, and collapsing ceilings.Now go play Wizardry 5 and see how weak all of PoR's levels compared to it. That's what I'm trying to tell you, stupid fuck - PoR's level are garbage, they have few illusionary walls, teleports and traps here and there, and you could lose an automap if you run from a fight which is a nice touch, hence why I KEPT TELLING YOU IDIOT about the WIZARD'S PYRAMID and GRAVEYARD (you'd knew why I mention them specifically in context of good level design if you've played PoR), but compare it to any Wizardry level and you will realize that it is practically nothing. Chest traps are not part of the level design by the way.>Map design is about how things flowWhat's that even supposed to mean? Please, quit talking like a woman.>didn't even know there were trapsAgain, I told you brainlet about wizard's pyramid and graveyard from the very beginning. Of course since you haven't played a second of PoR you didn't get it.>I did, and they were faggot shit.That weren't even a reply to you.
>>3839335My only experience was Pool of Radiance, Ruins of Myth Drannor (I think).
>>3842757Also worth noting that when I talked about the lack of traps I talked specifically about the final maze. And I pointed out on that clearly. You have terrible reading skills if you interpreted it as what I thought on the level design in general, even though that interpretation is partly right too.
>>3840017I can't put my finger on it what is it that bugs me about mezzabarburimcazanzan, all I remember is that it somehow felt much less fun than ravenloft
>>3842843>>3842846>doubles down>showing his stupidityYea, that's the thing, those maps only show the layout, dipshit. They don't show trap and monster placement. Nice way of showing off you never played the game and are simply a zoomer going off information you've found online.>What's that even supposed to mean? Please, quit talking like a woman.How about you quit talking like an autistic inbred?Get the fuck outta here, dumbass, lmao, let me discuss this with someone who ACTUALLY played the fucking game, unlike you, clearly. I'm done with you. LARPers can fuck off.P.S. For future reference, it's best not to hinge your entire stupid argument on a single cherry picked part of an 18 - 24 hour long game, lmao.
>>3842843>Those are not actual levels. It's a fucking overworld map, and an overworld map is not a level - all it does is serving as an entrance to actual levels and giving you a random encounter or two, and an artistic depiction of Phlan that doesn't show what Phlan maps actually fucking are. At this point you begin showing yourself that you haven't played shit, even relating to the game you defending.You know, I was following this conversation pretty closely, and this is what sealed it for me that the other guy was right, and you never played the game. You can travel throughout the city...You can manually travel throughout the city and go to individual buildings/stores. They aren't "cutscenes". Neither is the overworld map travel either. You travel by segmented tile-based movement in the wilderness. You clearly don't know anything about the game but seemed to focus on the last pyramid specifically for some bizarre reason, as if that single dungeon somehow negates the rest of the game. Very bizarre. Very childish.
>>3842959>Yea, that's the thing, those maps only show the layout, dipshit. They don't show trap and monster placement.What is your point? There were barely any traps nor puzzles in the entire game. I remember the pyramid having a dart trap in the long hallway and a little puzzle with throwing stones to alter the warp destination, but that's about it. That's as far as PoR's puzzles go.>LARPLiterally sent you my save disk image with a finished game. Quit projecting.>>3842963>You can travel throughout the city...You can manually travel throughout the city and go to individual buildings/stores.My point was that the isometric map on the right IS NOT THE LEVELS ITSELF. And I didn't say a word about overworld travel and the town being cutscenes, I only talked about overworld travel and even then I didn't say that it's a cutscene, mentioning how it served as an entrance to actual levels and occasionally throwing encounters at you like in Wasteland. The isometric map on the right somehow follows the layout in the very vague fashion, but it's not showing you what those levels actually fucking are. He showed me this picture as an argument that PoR's level were better than Wizardry 5, and I don't need to explain how retarded that statement is. PoR's levels are small and simple. They barely have traps and puzzles. Compare any of these maps to a quarter of a Wizardry 5 level and they look pathetic.>but seemed to focus on the last pyramidIt's not the last. I remember the quest for it were in the mid-late part of the game, and after that I were either sent to lizardmen settlement or the gate.>as if that single dungeon somehow negates the rest of the gameClearly you didn't follow it that close, as I've consistently used it as an example of game's strong point in level design and not the opposite. My point was that it's as complex as PoR's level design can go, showing how weak it is in general.
>>3842973>What is your point? There were barely any traps nor puzzles in the entire game. I remember the pyramid having a dart trap in the long hallway and a little puzzle with throwing stones to alter the warp destination>immediately corrects himself, debunking his previous argument and showing how much of a retarded zoomer newfag he is>tries to double-down.>gives some random save disk he found online as proof he's an ebon reel gaymerLmao, get fucked kid, you got shown up and blown the fuck out and it shows, you can't lie anymore, just give it up.>My point was that the isometric map on the right IS NOT THE LEVELS ITSELF. Your retarded non-argument is that the overworld map is somehow not an actual overworld map....DESPITE....BEING USED...IN THE GAME...It doesn't matter if it's a level or not, cum-sock, you can travel on it, which makes it an active part of the game. And because encounters can happen on it, and you actively use it to travel....It's some sort of "in-between corridor between actual levels"? You're just sharting it up more and more as you go along, it's getting really pathetic and sad to witness at this point, jesus christ kiddo, all to pretend that a bunch of wireframe dungeons are somehow "better designed" because they have tilto-whirls and midnight rooms thrown in for good measure, lmao, get real you fuckin kiddo. You're a retard. With bad arguments. And no experience. The map design is part of the game's overall world design. I even SPECIFICALLY SAID MAP DESIGN, because there's more than just tile-based dungeon shit going on in PoR, unlike in Wizardry. God you are thick. Neck yourself.>Clearly you didn't follow it that close, as I've consistently used it as an example of game's strong point in level design and not the opposite. My point was that it's as complex as PoR's level design can go, showing how weak it isYou've just been ranting about how it doesn't have traps like the rest of the game, until you admitted that it did.
>>3842973>>3842846>>3842843>>3842253>>3842121I like how this silly faggot just got successfully roped in to defending his position on having played Pool of Radiance, instead of defending his position on Wizardry 5.>>3839335I liked the Krynn series. Didn't play much else. Savage Frontier was trash. Dungeon Hack was MEGA trash.
>>3842973>They barely have traps Thank god.
>>3843184Traps in the goldbox games are pointless anyway since you can save and rest basically everywhere.
>>3843131>I like how this silly faggot just got successfully roped in to defending his position on having played Pool of RadiancePinpoint to at least one thing I said that contradicted with what was in the game. Again, I sent my fucking save disk image. Quit samefagging and projecting.
>>3843124>gives some random save disk he found online as proof he's an ebon reel gaymerThe priestess from the party is named Sorn after a Wizardry 5 antagonist. But sure, a coincidence.>....DESPITE....BEING USED...IN THE GAME...I've sent you an actual fucking level from the game. You've sent me an overworld map and an isometric artistic depiction of game's levels, claiming it's better. You are retarded beyond belief.>You've just been ranting about how it doesn't have traps like the rest of the game, until you admitted that it did.You are a literal imbecile, I said the fucking opposite, learn to read. I were talking about it being GOOD from my very first post, and saying that the rest of the game were MID. How the fuck did you interpreted it as me saying that it didn't have traps? I never said that. You are just making shit up at this point.
>>3843124>until you admitted that it did.My very first post, mentioning it as an example of decent level design in PoR. "Also the level design were pretty mid APART from the pyramid and the final maze."That's what I fucking said. I have no idea what are you even on at this point, are you reading with your ass?
>>3839335Only the first 3 were good imo.
>>3843440>You are a literal imbecile, I said the fucking opposite, learn to read. I were talking about it being GOOD from my very first post, and saying that the rest of the game were MID. How the fuck did you interpreted it as me saying that it didn't have traps? I never said that. You are just making shit up at this point.>>3842253>Hell, even the rather big final maze is nothing but a plain damn maze - no traps, no spinners, no anti magic grids, no dark spots, just few teleporters here and there. Any amateur Wizardry player would map that garbage in no time.>no trapsSo unless that isn't you, you can kindly shut your big stupid fucking "trap" (pun intended) and quit larping.
>>3842852It was about Drittz, not your party. If you didn’t care for the Dark Elf Gary Stu than it’s a strictly worst version of the other games.
>>3839860Damn there needs to be a way to replace that shit with something legible instead.
I'm a GenX boomer and one of those who had a PC at the time of the Gold box games. Even at the time those games were too archaic and clunky for me to even remotely enjoy. They felt ancient in the early 90's. I can't imagine how they'd look like now.
>>3844523But... there really is no traps in the final maze. Unless the ability to cut through the wall with the risk of stinging a random character with a poisoned vine counts as one.
