/vr/ - Retro Games

You will beat it in six hours, four with a walkthrough. It will feel a lot longer than that because you have to crawl across the map very slowly. If you rush headlong into the wilderness you will get killed by some monster and have to start right back at the castle. The story is not as convoluted as Final Fantasy. Now set out and become a legend. The first four DQs have the exact same graphical formula and each have unique soundtracks.

http://crpgaddict.blogspot.com/2019/12/game-349-dragon-warrior-1986.html?m=1

A shitty time

>>6321646

A grindfest. But the game is still pretty interesting as a novelty of early JRPGs for consoles.

It shouldn't take too long to complete. Aside from all the mandatory grinding, the game's actual quests span maybe 20 or 30 minutes worth of content.

>New dragon quest anime

>>6321646
1 is a linear grinding experience. its ok but dq2 after will be huge

>>6321839
not fond of how this tries to downplay the party chat removal in dq4 ds localization

>>6322310
Nobody cares about Party Chat except people who pretend to care. It's fun at first, but then you get sick of it when you spend over an hour in a single town listening to whatever dumb shit your friends say about literally anything.

Dragon Quest 1 is a paradox, in that every updated version greatly reduces the grinding and makes the game far less boring, but at the same time the tedious grinding is an integral part of the game. In the original, you'd often find yourself tempted to try to muscle through the next stretch of land just for the sake of breaking up the monotony. Sure, you're about 4 levels too low to hit the next town and getting there's going to be a huge pain in the ass, but you've spent the last two hours grinding skeletons and you're so fucking sick of it you're willing to take that chance.

>>6321646
A pretty simple, easy going game. Not that you won't die or anything, but the limits to your options make deciding the best course of action pretty easy. (Do experement with your spells though, sleeping monsters is very good) So it's easy going, no stress. You know? Anyway it's very 'comfy' as the lads say.
>six hours,
Come on now, a blind run will take a bit longer. Doing it in one day is certainly feasible but I'd hazard to guess it'd take most people twice that.

>>6321646
All you do is grind.
Consider skipping to DQ3.

>>6322310
>not fond of how this tries to downplay the party chat removal in dq4 ds localization
Party chat is for autists.

>>6322630
I don't understand the point of grinding. Just make actually difficult and fun encounters instead of making them overpowered and forcing you to slaughter endless hordes of knights, wyverns, wizards, wolves, or whatever dumb shit for hours just for some measely point increases.

Is it wrong to enjoy grinding?

>>6322593
I just used it when there was something I wondered how they'd react to

>>6323070
Some people argue that RPG is all about increasing your stats.

>>6321646
>I didn't mind NES FF at all.
Then you'll probably enjoy DQ as a softer experience. Alternating between the first three FFs and DQs in order would probably be an enjoyable way to dump some time and it would really illustrate the difference between Square and Enix philosophies.

>>6321646
Game ENCOURAGES going into areas you aren't strong enough for and running from fights like a madman.
It's like a Puzzle survival game with RPG elements.
I fucking love it, but it might not be the best introduction to the series.

Dragon Quest 3 onward is when real RPG elements get cemented. 5 is a favorite, 8 is my personal recommendation.

>>6323070
Dragon Quest is largely a soft time management game. Grinding is required, but it's also extremely boring so you'll naturally seek out more efficient ways to do it. Whenever you buy armor or a weapon, it's a large gold investment so you need to carefully consider how much the item will increase your ability to grind. There's a gold cost to heal, so will getting the next armor decrease your damage enough to pay for itself or will doing a few points of extra damage be enough to kill enemies before they kill you? Or maybe you're already doing good enough and it's better to save gold for the next tier of items? There's a HEAVY weight to your choices because of the time investment of grinding. With increased gold and exp drops, it doesn't matter nearly as much. That's why I feel like cutting it down detracts from the experience.

>>6323162
Nope

>>6325592
Sounds alright, but once you already get decked out in the best gear and the final boss is still capable of completely molesting you, then you just wish the game would end already. Instead, you still have to go out and kill shit for a long time until you have a remotely better chance at killing him. It's not fun or forcing you to make hard decisions, it just feels like a tease. Would it have hurt to place maybe 2 more side caves to ease the grind?

>>6321839
>recommended version (tiny screen)
Why are people like this?

THE GREATEST GAME OF ALL TIME

>>6322301
Those people have the same face - almost thought it was photoshopped for a second

>>6321839
>recommends the remakes because they're piss-easy
Fucking casual scum

>>6321839
>As with DQ1, the GBC version has some strange localisation[sic] choices due to space contrainsts
Yet they completely ignore the DS versions being parody rewrites.

>>6326180
>go out and kill shit
Or just keep going through the last dungeon to get to the boss since you'll get XP from that each time and don't lose it on death
That aspect of DQ is comfy since you can just keep having goes at a dungeon until you beat it instead of reaching a required level threshold in advance

>>6329250
It doesn't work so well in the later games as the fight with the boss takes forever and you don't gain anything from them if you lose.
It's better to grind or search for hidden stuff you missed than run against a wall in hopes of eventually breaking through.

>>6321763
The any% speed run is 5 hours and change so if you're beating it in 6 blind or 4 with a guide you are pretty amazing.

>>6329258
It depends on the game. Like the final boss of DQ2 is VERY rng-heavy. I killed the shit out of him on my first run and wondered why it was so easy, only to later find out it's because he has a healing skill that he didn't bother to use against me.

>>6321646
DQ3 is unironically better and in my opinion represents the truest DW experience. DQ2 wasn’t bad but DQ1 was only good because of how “ground breaking” it was at the time.

Also I really like the Monsters games for gameboy. Probably more than the mainline games actually

>>6329838
>DQ1 was only good because of how “ground breaking” it was at the time.
The only thing notable was bringing a computer experience to consoles in an extremely basic form and even that had been done before.
The groundbreaking thing was popularity.

>>6329858
thats why i used “quotes”

I'm playing through 8 for the first time right now, and it is my first time playing DQ since maybe an hours worth of DQ1 on the NES over 20 years ago. I think I'll play 5 after I finish 8, so which version should I play?

>>6330862
SNES

The NDS version is good but it made changes. If you enjoy SNES JRPGs then you should try the original. No shame in the NDS version though

>>6331449
Any reason you are completely ignoring the PS2?

>>6321646
Start with 3 for open-ended gameplay, 5 for best story, or 8 for best graphics and good gameplay+story.
Don't ever start with 1 and don't play it until you're a huge fan of the series already, and play 2 and 7 dead last.

Note A: people say that you need to play DQ1 to properly enjoy 3. This is false. 1 and 3 reference each other, but the reference works both ways and is completely unimportant to enjoyment of either game.

Note B: DQ4, 5, and 6, the "Zenithian Trilogy", are practically unrelated. Each has a land in the sky and a set of equipment and that's literally it.

>>6331474
The PS2 remake of DQ5 is by far the best version of the game (and DS remake the worst). Its only downside is it isn't portable unless you're playing on a laptop.

>>6331485
>Each has a land in the sky and a set of equipment and that's literally it.
1-3 also have that equipment.
Overall 6 felt more connected to 3 than to 4 or 5.

>>6331474
because it sucks

I can't get into these cutesy looking RPGs. Phantasy Star is the only respectable RPG from that era.

>>6321646
>I didn't mind NES FF at all.
That's because it's a far better game than Dragon Quest.

Grinding, do yourself a favor and play the GBC port.

>>6321646
What are the best jrpg's on the nes? I started playing final fantasy 1 last night and for the first time since I tried it 20 years ago it finally clicked and I'm loving it. I got into jrpg's through the snes and ps1 classics and had my expectations shaped around the by-then established conventions of jrpg's so I always found ff1 crude and boring. Eventually I grew to hate the entire genre due to all the cliches, melodrama and pretentiousness that eventually subsumed the genre and turned it into the joke it is today.

But the first final fantasy feels a lot more like playing b/x dungeons and dragons or something, it's really fun. Fresh specifically because it predates the movie game trappings of ff4 onwards

>>6321646
Is this the game where you can make your PC a clown that can only juggle until he blossoms into an overpowered death machine once hes hit a certain level? I watched a roommate play through some NES JRPG like that at some point

>>6335183
No, DQ1 is a very straight forward high-fantasy JRPG.

>>6335183
Sounds like you may be thinking of DQ3, where can choose to have a fool (or three) as party members who often goof off uselessly in battle (or also sometimes have useful effects, but you have no control over it). They can be class changed into sages who are magical powerhouses.

>>6328689
you're implying the nes games were hard

>>6331485
IV has a better story than 5. And the grinding in 5 is also shit