/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.1053319]

Wizardry vs. Might and Magic, which is the better series /vr/?

[Anonymous No.1053367]

Wizardry because it punishes me for liking it.

[Anonymous No.1053479]

also Bards Tale

[Anonymous No.1053489]

>>1053367

pretty much this, they're both absolutely fantastic but wizardry is for the hardcore/masochist rpg lover

[Anonymous No.1053495]

the third level in the wizardry is such bullshit

[Anonymous No.1053501]

the third level in the first wizardry is such bullshit

[Anonymous No.1053529]

Gotta say which point in the series we're comparing, they both became their own thing after a certain point. Wizardry 4 hardly plays like Wizardry 1-3, and Wizardry 6 is practically a different series.

[Anonymous No.1054279]

>>1053501
Good that you can skip it then

[Anonymous No.1054517]

can you rain meteors and exploding stars on helpless villagers in Wizardry? This is important.

[Anonymous No.1054550]

>>1054517
No, Wizardry is a series where those things happen to you.

[Anonymous No.1054552]

Guys, i need most awesome-part-of-wizardy-ever

[Anonymous No.1054586]

>>1054552
>most awesome-part-of-wizardy-ever
Eh?

[Anonymous No.1055014]

Which type of RPG combat does /vr/ prefer? Blobber, or tactical?

[Anonymous No.1055041]

>>1055014
If it's fast as fuck then blobber, otherwise tactical all the way, even for games that are otherwise blobbers.

[Anonymous No.1055053]

The only good Wizardry game was on the PS2.

[Anonymous No.1055061]

>>1055053
No

[Anonymous No.1056158]

>>1055014

I must be getting old, WTF is blobber?

[Anonymous No.1056175]

>>1056158
Party based first person dungeon crawler, IIRC it's an RPGCodex term

[Anonymous No.1056353]

Wizardry is a game made by the devil.

Navigation is cruel. No matter how good you think you are navigating you need a fucking hand-drawn map. Anyone who managed to map out this game on real graph paper instead of a computer program has my respect. I thought I was a bad ass for navigating zelda 2 without ever drawing a map but I can't even handle the first floor of wizardry.

You need to grind. But you need to grind on the right things and avoid the stuff that kills you. Also you need to do it efficiently and not overgrind or your character will grow old and die.


Also you need to have the right party set up, you cant just run whatever you feel like it. And you better figure out the right party set up FAST because when characters die it takes a fortune to revive them.

None of the spells or items have any description, everything has to be a fucking puzzle.


I'm fucking terrified of this game series I dont think I'll ever play them again.

[Anonymous No.1056365]

>>1056353
>Also you need to do it efficiently and not overgrind or your character will grow old and die.
Wrong, there's a simple trick that you might abuse to prevent your characters from ever growing old, unless you change their class (which adds 5 years per class change). I'd almost call it a bug, but it seems to reappear in every "classic" Wizardry game and most japanese clones of it, so...

[Anonymous No.1056368]

>>1056353
Also
>And you better figure out the right party set up FAST because when characters die it takes a fortune to revive them.
And making a new character costs nothing. Discard your dead level 1 meatheads (don't forget to strip the gear off of them) and take the 2 minutes to replace them with somebody just as if not even more efficient.
>None of the spells or items have any description, everything has to be a fucking puzzle.
For spells, use the manual. Items you have to mostly figure out by trial and error, but beware of cursed items.

[Anonymous No.1056742]

>>1056353
>None of the spells or items have any description

Pretty sure you can read up what spells do in the SNES version of Wizardry 1-3

[Anonymous No.1056762]

Wizardry 6 > Wizardry 5 > Wizardry 8 > Wizardry 7 > Wizardry 1-3 > Wizardry 4

[Anonymous No.1056765]

>>1056353

If you play these types of games enough, you get the hang of navigating by memory alone like a bushman.

Except for dungeons full of illusion puzzles.

[Anonymous No.1056772]

>>1056762
>Wizardry 6 better than 7 and 8
Dohoho

[Anonymous No.1056817]

>>1056772

Wizardry 7 and 8 were fucking bloated messes compared to Wizardry 6.

6 had better-designed areas (seriously, look at W7's areas in Cosmic Forge's map viewer -- most of them are actually very linear pathways which snake around like the Amazon River to give the illusion of vast expanses of wilderness). Wizardry 6's dungeons were structured more believably and with better pacing, whereas Wizardry 7 relies way too much on player backtracking.

6 also had combat that didn't fucking drag on and on and on and pull you into a mindset of tepid boredom. 7 and 8 are full of too many monsters whose every attack comes with a status ailment; 6 does have its share of status-spamming monsters (mainly in the River Styx) but, hey, at least the spells you have also work against monsters in Wizardry 6.

[Anonymous No.1056828]

>>1056817
As if Wizardry 6 wasn't linear and didn't force you to backtrack whenever you wanted to buy anything that your current shopkeeper doesn't stock. And while the areas in Wiz 7 can be considered "linear", the game progression definitely isn't.

>6 also had combat that didn't fucking drag on and on and on and pull you into a mindset of tepid boredom.
But it didn't do anything particularily interesting with it either. Wiz 7 has the exact same type of combat and comparable amounts of monsters. Don't see how is it worse.
>too many monsters whose every attack comes with a status ailment
And it keeps you on your toes, because a well-executed party-wide status ailment can devastate or at least severely dent even a high-level party. How is making battles more interesting a flaw?
>hey, at least the spells you have also work against monsters in Wizardry 6.
What? Spells work well against monsters in all three games.

[Anonymous No.1056851]

>>1056828
>force you to backtrack whenever you wanted to buy anything that your current shopkeeper doesn't stock

The only shopkeeper in that game that sold anything worth buying was whatever her name was... I called her Blackie McBoobywoman, the one in River Styx by the storage shed. I never, ever remember saying "gee, I sure wish Queequeg was around".

Backtracking in Wizardry 6 was also a matter of planting explosives in the castle alchemy lab or finding a key -- and tada, you really don't have to walk more than 15-20 steps to get back to the castle if you need to.

>But it didn't do anything particularily interesting with it either. Wiz 7 has the exact same type of combat and comparable amounts of monsters. Don't see how is it worse.

As I said, monster encounters in Wizardry 7 were poorly done, and I already explained why. Status ailment spamming is fucking dogshit, you could really tell Mr. Bradley had lost his touch by that game.

>And it keeps you on your toes, because a well-executed party-wide status ailment can devastate or at least severely dent even a high-level party. How is making battles more interesting a flaw?

How is constantly throwing 3 groups of Spectral Moths at your party "interesting"? Even against one group, if there's more than 4 or 5 moths, your party is pretty much guaranteed to be put to mass-sleep even if some of your own party's status attacks land, because somehow Sleep lasts indefinitely on your party, but only 1 or 2 rounds against monsters.

>What? Spells work well against monsters in all three games.

Wizardry 7 monsters always seem to be conveniently immune to the specific attacks which make the most strategic sense.

Wizardry 7 is not "interesting" or "strategic". It's you against the RNG. Even Nethack doesn't stoop to such heavy-handed, poorly thought combat.

[Anonymous No.1056867]

>>1056817
>6 also had combat that didn't fucking drag on and on and on and pull you into a mindset of tepid boredom.
I completely agree with this.
Compared to 6, 7 is just fucking slow. So much pointless filler shit just wasting your time to make it seem bigger than the game really is.
Don't get me wrong both are great and 7 has beautiful visuals, but I also prefer 6 because it's to the point and simply fun to play.

[Anonymous No.1056864]

>>1056851
>"gee, I sure wish Queequeg was around".
If you needed armor before River Styx, you had to go to Queequeg. Same with potions and books. And McBoobywoman would disappear forever after you complete Caterpillar's quest.
>How is constantly throwing 3 groups of Spectral Moths at your party "interesting"?
Spectral Moths are annoying, but they are confined to a single stretch of land in the game. It's easy to hide from them, which makes them simple to handle.
>Wizardry 7 monsters always seem to be conveniently immune to the specific attacks which make the most strategic sense.
Because spamming lute every single turn in Wiz 6 made was so deep and tactical.
>Wizardry 7 is not "interesting" or "strategic". It's you against the RNG.
Sounds like you're playing the wrong series then, dude. Wizardry is RNG-heavy in general. Even Wiz 6.

[Anonymous No.1056881]

>>1056864

I never once ran into the Caterpillar. I didn't even know he was in the game, as I avoided walkthroughs and didn't even peel open the cluebook until beating it.

>Spectral Moths are annoying, but they are confined to a single stretch of land in the game.

That stretch of land you start out in if you import a Bane save if you got the "you took my pen!" ending.

>Sounds like you're playing the wrong series then, dude. Wizardry is RNG-heavy in general. Even Wiz 6.

Wizardry 1-4 are heavily influenced by the RNG. Wizardry 5, yes, it had a lot of insta-death moments... yet you could always have elbow room to still make good last-minute decisions to save your ass in a bind. Wizardry 6 continued that balance very well. And then Wizardry 7 went back to the older Wizardry 1 level of influence the RNG has -- I'm not going to budge when I say the RNG has too much sway here. RPGs should be games where skill and prudent decision making can outdo bad luck.

>Because spamming lute every single turn in Wiz 6 made was so deep and tactical.

It's perfectly possible to play through W6 without ever having a bard in your party. I'm not sure I can say that about Wizardry 7.

[Anonymous No.1056884]

>>1056867
The combat in 6 isn't really much faster than in 7 though. 7 has a bigger abundance of debilitating conditions, but as I said, it keeps the fights more interesting than just "spam melee attacks, use lute and hide" for 80% of the game. Getting your killing-machine samurai stunned by a T'Rang assassin does tip the scales against you quite a lot.

[Anonymous No.1056895]

>>1056881
>That stretch of land you start out in if you import a Bane save if you got the "you took my pen!" ending.
The alternate beginnings weren't exactly balanced at all and are notoriously difficult. Writing off the whole game because of this is just bullshit; if you don't like it, start a new party.
>Wizardry 6 continued that balance very well.
Yeah, about that... I don't think you remember the Temple of Ramm very well. Or Brothers Grynn. Or the Amazulu Queen. Or that samurai turbofaggot that took me like 30 tries.
>And then Wizardry 7 went back to the older Wizardry 1 level of influence the RNG has
The same rule that Wizardry has been running on since the start also applies to Wiz 7: if you can't kill it, run away. Also applicable to spectral moths, best done if the runner is also hidden.
>It's perfectly possible to play through W6 without ever having a bard in your party. I'm not sure I can say that about Wizardry 7.
Bards were nerfed for 7, of course you can.

[Anonymous No.1057031]

>>1056895
>run away

Hard to run when your party is put to sleep.

[Anonymous No.1057398]

>>1057031
>what is Hide

[Anonymous No.1060767]

Out of the first 5, what's the best Wizardry?

[Anonymous No.1060945]

>>1060767
5

[Anonymous No.1061013]

[Anonymous No.1061018]

[Anonymous No.1061328]

Now we are with Wizardry... What's the deal with the Japanese Wizardry games such as Wizardry Online? I know they did love these games (Japanese and their love for self-punishing games), but where do these Wizardry come exactly? Because they seem to have little to do with all I've seen of the Sir-Tech games.

[Anonymous No.1061363]

>>1061328
Some jap producer something something and some company got rights to make their own Wizardry gaiden game. It was popular, so they made other games. The fact that Robert Woodhead is a weeaboo also helped. After Sir-Tech died, Japan shrugged and continued making Wizardry the way they already used to. And then somebody got the idea that the series isn't making enough dosh, pointed to WoW and Dark Souls and lo, Wizardry Online was born.

[Anonymous No.1063896]

Wizardry had way more impact (both with Ultima) on RPGs in both west and east than MnMs

[Anonymous No.1066437]