/vr/ - Retro Games

>>4274467
What's the differences from the playstation and dreamcast ports? I don't mean to start a console war or anything.

>>4274470
A lot of differences unfortunately. If you google "Gauntlet Legends version differences" there's a page that tells you all about it (I'd link but I'm lazy), but I'll give you a quick rundown.

PlayStation version is probably the worst. It's the only version that supports only 2 players, you can't sell items you find, level geometry is simpler, less secrets, etc.

Dreamcast version is really fucking weird. It's basically a bastard child of the arcade version and Dark Legacy which is an enhanced version released on PS2/Xbox/GCN (although this version is worse in many ways despite being "enhanced"). It has some levels from both of those versions, but you can't save any of the items you find, you can't sell items, some characters from DL appear and not others, etc. It's just a weird version that I would avoid.

N64 is the best. 4 player support, you can save, buy and sell items, you have a visual item inventory that no other version has, etc.

>>4274467
Have 2 copies of this one. VGA installed on my DC looks great.

>>4274470
DC has the other characters and some different levels I think.

This version is most notable for being a near-direct arcade port. The four Realms from the arcade version are included, however some of the levels were completely redone. A new physics engine was used, and some of the soundtracks were remixed.

Like the arcade version, there is no inventory. The player can only access the shop after completing a level. Special items are used on a time limit, which is slightly longer than the arcade version. The game is often criticized for not allowing players to buy food at the shop.

This port includes many features from Gauntlet: Dark Legacy. The 8 new character classes are playable here. The Poisoned Fields is included as the first level in the Castle Stronghold. The Mausoleum is also accessed from a secret passage in the Castle Courtyard.

>>4274561
I wonder how rare those pewter figurines are.

>>4274570
I don't have any (sadface)

>>4274573
I'd love one of the Blue Wizard if they even made it.

It sucks they never continued making Gauntlet games in this style. The series plummeted with that piece of shit Seven Sorrows because they felt like they needed to be all dark and edgy.

>>4274586
Gauntlet online (Steam) is okay. Seens a buddy playing it. Not as good as Legends tho.

>>4274480
>PlayStation version is probably the worst
Comparatively. But that doesn't make it unplayable. It's one of the best party games for the PS.

>Dreamcast version is weird
The Dark Legacy content was backported as a bonus since the port came so late. IMO, it doesn't really stand out as odd. The PS version also had backported content, like a select few stages from Dark Legacy.

>>4274627
>Comparatively. But that doesn't make it unplayable. It's one of the best party games for the PS
Not really a good party game when it only supports 2 players. And yeah, it's playable, but when every other version is better, why bother?
>The Dark Legacy content was backported as a bonus since the port came so late. IMO, it doesn't really stand out as odd. The PS version also had backported content, like a select few stages from Dark Legacy.
The PS version came out before DL if I recall, so I don't think it was "backported", just that a few of the PS levels made it into DL. The Dreamcast version is odd because it's a strange amalgamation between arcade and 6th gen console ports, with no real strengths to speak of.

>>4274661
>why bother?
Because you don't have any other consoles at your disposal, and / or because the game has it's own charm. I have access to other versions of Legends and DL, but I do curiously replay the PS port of Legends every now and then. The differences between versions are large enough that each one provides a somewhat unique experience.

>The PS version came out before DL
They were released in the same year. I don't think the PS port of Legends introduced anything to DL. The port was handed over to a small dev team that was instructed to port over existing assets in just six months. They didn't design any original assets / levels themselves.

>>4274467
Fucking excellent game. Midway -- in the 90s in particular -- was one of the best arcade developers EVER.

>>4274919
Yep. For my money, they were the real best developer on the N64. Everyone always says it was Rare, but Midway was next level shit above even Nintendo themselves, as far as I'm concerned.

It's just a shame that pic related never got ported.

Played it in the arcade a few times. It was really good.

>>4274962
>they were the real best developer on the N64
My absolute negrosexual. I've always said the same thing and nobody really understands why, probably because most people aren't really familiar with the N64 library and just how many amazing games Midway was responsible for. Midway made/published so many fucking fantastic N64 games, they were definitely in my holy trinity next to Rare and Nintendo themselves. All the good PC ports, DOOM fucking 64, the best home console version of Gauntlet by a mile, great racing games, you name it. Absolute badasses.

>>4274467
Had a buddy in college who had this. I've wanted to get it ever since. God-tier couch co-op.
>>4275430
NFL Blitz, my nigga. Great for small dorm room parties.

>>4274586
Diablo 3 on consoles feels pretty similar to this game, just with more depth, though you don't always want that much depth and just want something simple, which is why I still play Dark Legacy.

>>4274480
How is Dark Legacy worse when it's just the same game with more content?

>>4274480
GCN?

>>4275430
>the best home console version of Gauntlet by a mile
>imagine being this delusional

>>4274467
Diablo is the deeper game which is why people remember it while Gauntlet was a very fine novelty act.

A lot of Gautnlet is gimmicky. There's no not-so-hidden crystals which are just there because collectathons were in style. A lot of the power ups and turbos are basically identical and the class difference is pretty superficial minus the aesthetics with a very superficial and poorly balanced stat system: the magic stat for instance only affects potions and the strength stat takes hundreds of points to be able to actually kill anything in 1 less hit, and it's way too easy to just grind for food if you ever get stuck on a level.

It's a game really carried by the aestetic charm. The awesome narrator, the goofy visuals, and fun sound affects. The mechanics were dated when it came out. The hidden walls everywhere really were awesome though.

>>4274470
The original arcade is the best because of its nude Valkyrie code. The funny thing is that you could go to any arcade and the nude Valkyrie would always be max level because so many people used her. It's a shame that she was removed in subsequent versions, and she's not in any of the home versions as far as I know.

The arcade version had a contest to win a t-shirt.

>>4274919
Midway were part of Nintendo's "dream team" stable of developers given special preference and resources.

>>4276120
Diablo was just for the PC crowd, though...Diablo 1 got ported to PSX, but why would you play that version? Nowadays we have Diablo 3 on consoles, which brings back the old feelings of playing Legends but with added depth.

In multiplayer, does each player/controller need a save pak, or can you just use one to save every player's progress?

>>4276678
you can save each player's progress in just one controller pak

>>4276095
Okay, what exactly do you disagree with? The 6th gen ports have a few more levels and characters (which are basically all identical anyway), but are riddled with game-breaking bugs, have no real item inventory, don't let you sell all of your items, don't let you check your character stats in-game, etc. Sounds like you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

>>4276057
>How is Dark Legacy worse when it's just the same game with more content?
Because it's not. If all you care about is having more levels, then sure, it's better. And granted, there are a lot more. However, the levels themselves are very different anyway. The main issue with Dark Legacy is that it is an absolute mess from a design perspective. For example, in the N64 version, you have a visual item inventory where you can see everything you have, and you can activate or deactivate those items with the push of a button. You can also view your character's level, amount of gold, quest items, experience, stats, etc. in your own personal quadrant on the screen. In Dark Legacy, they fucked it up. You can longer visually see what items you have, and to make matters worse, there's an awful bug that is ever-present and prevents you from correcting activating them. There's also myriad other little flaws, like not being able to sell everything you find, even though you could do so in the older versions. It's just a less polished product as a whole.

Red Wizard Needs Food Badly

>>4276120
I have to disagree with you on this. I've played Diablo 2 since 2002 so I recognize that it's a great series, amazing in fact, but the focus is ultimately different. Diablo's strength is that it allows for more customization and inherent depth, but this is also a weakness too. One of the great things about Gauntlet is that it's so accessible, but unlike most arcade-style games, it has a ton of depth as well because the gameplay is more diverse than other slashers. Diablo quickly becomes very repetitive because all you're really doing is killing enemies and collecting loot. Were it not for the social aspect, PvP and whatnot, the game would grow stale -- which is one reason that Diablo 3 failed to meet the standards set by D2 because it lacked these features. Conversely, in Gauntlet, there are so many things that break the monotony of combat. Secrets to uncover, puzzles to solve, all sorts of traps to avoid, various quest items to seek out, secret levels and characters to unlock, you name it.

>>4276784
Thanks

>>4276872
Not that anon but I'll add that if you happen to have a friend that also has a copy of the game, it's pretty cool being able to store a character on your own controller pak. You just bring your controller over to a friend's house, plug it in, and your characters are playing together.

>>4276842
>You can longer visually see what items you have
Which version are we talking about? The PS2 port that I have gives you a status screen that shows you how many crystals, golden items, legend items and window fragments you've collected. You can't see (or toggle) temporary power-ups, however. That feature seems to be exclusive to some of the console ports of Legends, like N64 and PS1. The GC port of Dark Legacy *tries* to implement a toggle function for power-ups, but it's incredibly bugged.

>there's an awful bug that is ever-present and prevents you from correcting activating them
Are you referring to the GC version?

>>4276880
That's actually all I have experience with, which I think is a great use of save paks.

I never tried the other way. I was recently playing four-player but no one had a save pak, so we just started from the beginning and lost all our progress, and that's what got me curious.

>>4276884
>Which version are we talking about? The PS2 port that I have gives you a status screen that shows you how many crystals, golden items, legend items and window fragments you've collected. You can't see (or toggle) temporary power-ups, however. That feature seems to be exclusive to some of the console ports of Legends, like N64 and PS1. The GC port of Dark Legacy *tries* to implement a toggle function for power-ups, but it's incredibly bugged.
I'm talking about every 6th gen version. If you look at pic related (which is the N64 version) you can see that your items are displayed in an inventory. You can toggle them on and off and see how much of every item you have with ease. You can also view the typical screen that shows gold, potions, etc. like every version has, but you can also scroll through your character's stats and other information which you can't do on the later versions. But yeah, the GCN version is complete shit because they removed the visual inventory from the N64, replaced it with a text-based inventory, but it doesn't even work correctly.

>there's an awful bug that is ever-present and prevents you from correcting activating them
Yep. I've never had the liberty of playing the Xbox version but I'm pretty sure this glitch is present in that version as well.

>>4276898
Oops, forgot pic.

>>4276895
>That's actually all I have experience with, which I think is a great use of save paks.
Agreed, this kind of thing is one of the few advantages to using save paks. I wish more games had utilized this feature.
>I never tried the other way. I was recently playing four-player but no one had a save pak, so we just started from the beginning and lost all our progress, and that's what got me curious.
Yeah now that you know, I'd say just buy a single controller pak and go wild. Definitely worth saving your progress. Get an OEM pak though, they're dirt cheap. 3rd party paks are notoriously shit.

>>4276898
>which you can't do on the later versions

But these features are present in the PS1 port as well. Your stats, power-ups and quest items are accessible from within the HUD at all times. Power-ups can be freely toggled off and on, except for a few power-ups that appear only within stages (e.g. anti-death and invulnerability can't normally be toggled, but there is a way to cheat them out of the stage)

>>4276910
Didn't Perfect Dark do something similar with custom character profiles? Can't think of much else besides that, maybe some sports games

Of course I have a pak bro, how else could I beat Quest 64?

>>4276934
>But these features are present in the PS1 port as well.
Not really sure what this has to do with anything. I'm talking about 6th gen ports, never mentioned anything about PS1. But the PS1 version is pretty shit, too. Levels are simplified and downsized, terrible loading times, support for only 2 players, can't sell items, vastly reduced enemy count, the list goes on. N64 version is easily the best by a mile.

>>4277279
>I'm talking about 6th gen ports

You seem to be comparing the N64 version of Legends to other versions of Legends, or you're retroactively comparing the N64 version to Dark Legacy. Frankly, the current direction of this thread makes no sense.

The only thing I was pointing out was that the PS1 port has essentially the same content as the N64 port, minus four-player support. For so many anons to call it the "worst" version seems a bit exaggerated, especially if they're not actually aware of the large number of similarities to the N64 version.

>>4277279
>I'm talking about 6th gen ports
>N64 version is easily the best by a mile
>N64
>6th gen

?

>>4277352
I don't know what you're having trouble understanding. Some anon asked what the differences between the versions were, I told him and explained why the PS version was one of the weakest. You (or somebody) said:
>How is Dark Legacy worse when it's just the same game with more content?
And I explained why Dark Legacy is an overall worse experience than Legends, and then simply stated why the N64 version in particular was the best. This isn't really a hard concept to understand my dude.

>The only thing I was pointing out was that the PS1 port has essentially the same content as the N64 port, minus four-player support
Okay but see, it's not. I just listed numerous critical differences between these two. If you're okay with what essentially boils down to the N64 version but with shorter levels, load times, no 4 player, less enemies, less items, and less overall features, then okay, but yeah, it's pretty much objectively the worst.

>>4277363
I was comparing the N64 version to the 6th gen ports, the other anon started talking about the PS1. I said I'm talking about the 6th gen ports -- as in, I was specifically comparing the N64 version to 6th gen and made no mention of PS1.

>>4276823
It also doesn't need the RAM pack for 4 player has (for Dreamcast) 480p.

>>4277486
Dude an expansion pak costs like $10. Pretty small disadvantage compared to the fact that Dreamcast version doesn't even have a fucking item inventory.

>>4276857
The rpg mechanic is more than just customization, it adds an element of tactics. You've got resistances to juggle, need to make a compromise between item-finding, tankiness, and damage output, get enough mana items so you arn't constantly going oom but not so much it's excessive, get a feel for what stats your build scales with best and micromanage a lot of your stats.

The reason it's still being played is because each build requires being micromanaged slightly different and your choices are different every time due to the random loot.

That and d2 is still second only to PoE in terms of aestetics.

Gauntlet does have a lot more mechanics than d2, in fact the design choice seems to be to shove as many mechanics as they could. They do add much needed variety but none are very well thought out. The secret characters are basically just graphic swaps, the puzzles are almost excluisvily switch puzzles (one of the most stock game puzzles ever) and the traps are pretty lame. Same with all the redudent power ups. 4 amulets that differ only in visuals and which do basically the same thing as the turbo shot, the phoenix, and the giant growth. The visual variety is appreciated but it's still just a gimmick. The secrets however were top-notch quality, I can't think of any game with better use of fake walls in history.

This is ultimately why Gauntlet Dark Legacy never went on to have any sequals anyone cared about or clones (while d2's has many believed clones). Because the basic mechanical design was gimmicky and lacked depth there was nothing to build on. Think about it. Say you were handed a blank check and told to make a Gauntlet successor. What exactly would you build on? I bet a lot of what you'd do is add in the superior mechanics of the diablo clones. Say the d3's rune system or PoE's itemization. Focus on having fewer but deeper classes.

>>4277537
point is that N64 can't really handle it, of all the versions it runs and looks the worst.

>>4277560
No actually it doesn't. The PS1 version looks like complete shit. Obviously 6th gen versions are going to look better because they're running on superior hardware. The gameplay is flawed, though.

>>4277543
>>4277543
>This is ultimately why Gauntlet Dark Legacy never went on to have any sequals anyone cared about or clones (while d2's has many believed clones).
But that's just wrong. Gauntlet Legends/Dark Legacy was actually very popular, which is why it was released on just about every console in creation. Not to mention Gauntlet was a name brand years and years before Diablo was even a design concept. The Gauntlet brand as a whole took a dive BECAUSE it tried to be more like Diablo -- gritty, dark and more like an actual RPG. That wasn't what people who liked Gauntlet wanted, and the series no longer stood out. Thus it fell into mediocrity. But that isn't because Gauntlet's core design is somehow flawed or overly simplistic, it's purely because of mismanagement on the part of the people responsible for making the newer games in the series.
>Because the basic mechanical design was gimmicky and lacked depth there was nothing to build on
First off, there's nothing gimmicky or lacking about Gauntlet's design. "Gimmick" is a buzzword that doesn't really mean anything, at least in this context. Gauntlet's core gameplay is extremely tight and simplistic, but there is plenty of depth to the game, much of which Diablo lacks. Regardless, the game's design has nothing to do with what happened to the series. By this logic, games like Mario, Call of Duty and every other franchise which continually receives minor incremental tweaks with every release would fall victim to the same fate.

Also, just so you know, the four amulets actually don't differ only in visuals. Enemies each have elemental weaknesses. I can see why you'd think that but if you play on expert difficulty and fight some of the tougher monsters you'll see what I mean.

>>4277596
>First off, there's nothing gimmicky or lacking about Gauntlet's design. "Gimmick" is a buzzword that doesn't really mean anything, at least in this context. Gauntlet's core gameplay is extremely tight and simplistic, but there is plenty of depth to the game, much of which Diablo lacks.

Here's the ultimate proof that Diablo has deeper mechanics. If you go to a diablo thread people will be discussing the game's stats, items, and how they interact with various builds. Because it's deep there's a lot to talk about. While in this Gauntlet thread no one is talking about the mechanics because there isn't enough depth to provoke a discussion.

>Also, just so you know, the four amulets actually don't differ only in visuals. Enemies each have elemental weaknesses
LOL. That's pretty fucking shallow, escpially since the game is easy enough so I never bothered to learn what was weak to what.

>expert difficulty and fight some of the tougher monsters you'll see what I mean.
This isn't a hard game, it's the type of game where you rarely die and if you do you do you arn't sent back very far. If you get to a general or golem you just blow it up with a turbo, if you don't have a turbo you can get em stuck on a wall.

>By this logic, games like Mario, Call of Duty and every other franchise which continually receives minor incremental tweaks with every release would fall victim to the same fate.

What the hell are you talking about? Gauntlet did NOT receive incremental tweaks because it never got a sequal or even a clone (at least none anyone cares about, see Seven Sorrows). My reason was there was way to improve it because the design has no direction of which to improve. I gave you THE question to answer which would prove me wrong at the end my post and you completly ignored it!!!

I'll repeat it.

>What exactly would you build on?