| |
Site Navigation Main News Forums
Games Games Database Top 100 Release List Support Files
Features Reviews Previews Interviews Editorials Diaries Misc
Download Gallery Music Screenshots Videos
Miscellaneous Staff Members Privacy Statement
|
 |
|
|
Garrett

Joined: 13 Jul 2001
Posts: 74
Location: Munich, Germany |
ooops...yes, flora, not fauna...sorry.
and, no i did not want to invalidate, i just wanted to point out, that all is not bad in DL...which one might think from all the negative comments and no no positive comments at all...and there are many things that DL makes good. |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:51 pm |
|
|
yeesh
Keeper of the Gates

Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 113
Location: Unofficially representing Queens |
If DL's combat system or DL's skill system or DL's selection of magic items or DL's crafting system (such as it is) or DL's variety of monsters were 1/5th as good as Diablo II 1.10, the game would be an 7.5 - 8.0 even with empty rooms (who cares?), no changing your character's hair color (who cares?), and a missing map (annoying, but hardly the end of the world). Because it would be fun and rewarding to hack up all those 10-packs of monsters, instead of such a chore.
I propose that you elitists have to either a) go back and play through Diablo II 1.10 or b) quit badmouthing Diablo II, under penalty of banning for commenting on that which you do not know. Will there ever be an action/RPG which doesn't feature a million mouseclicks? No, yet DII is slammed for being a click-fest. How many games feature 7 different classes AND many COMPLETELY different builds carefully balanced within each class? And yet DII's character development system is panned as shallow. Has there ever been another single game made TO THIS DAY that can boast such a massive cast of unique items to find IN ADDITION to more or less infinite combinations of randomized stats on the hundreds (thousands?) of "normal" magic items? And yet DII is blasted, blasted, blasted.
Shame on you people. DII 1.10 is Blizzard's love-letter to the PC CRPG community, and it is awesome. It might not be your cup of tea, but perhaps you don't like killing monsters for loot and experience. And if that's not what a CRPG is about, then I've been gaming in the wrong genre. Plot, dialogue choices, ambient grass and leaves... that's all fine and well during rest periods, or for adventure games, but I'm not here to play Zork 2005; I'm here to kill stuff.
That's why characters have levels. Think about it and tell me I'm wrong.
Don't compare DL to DII. DII is fun, and that's why thousands of people are still playing it this very minute, a veritable lifetime after it came out. DL, well, it's not great. It's not a crime against humanity, but it's not fun either. |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:45 pm |
|
|
Moriendor
Black Ring Leader

Joined: 19 Jul 2001
Posts: 1306
Location: Germany |
I find it sort of bizarre that this is turning into Diablo 2 vs Dungeon Lords. You guys are comparing a five year old game to a game that has just been released.
That's like putting yourselves into the shoes of someone who played Diablo 2 five years ago, then fell into a coma, just woke up last week and you made him try Dungeon Lords.
Of course, that person might be slightly impressed by some of the things Dungeon Lords has to offer.
But what would the same person (like us "haters") think about Dungeon Lords if he had played Dungeon Siege, Gothic 1 & 2, Morrowind, Divinity, Neverwinter Nights, Star Wars KotOR 1&2 or even great non-RPGs like Half-Life 2, GTA etc. etc. in between?
Right. Totally different story. We "haters" have become used to a certain level of quality in games and this is even more true for those of us "haters" who do not play RPGs only but good or even excellent games from a variety of genres.
Dungeon Lords just doesn't live up to the expectations I have of a current game. In no department... [Opinion based on demo] .
On a different note and this is mostly directed at Roqua... I believe that Dhruin only listed features that Heuristic promised would be in the game. It's rather pointless IMHO to give examples of other games that had the missing Dungeon Lords features. That's like saying Dungeon Lords has elves and fairies but Half-Life 2 didn't and so Dungeon Lords must be superior .
That was not the point, I think. The point Dhruin tried to make was that Heuristic promised features that they didn't deliver.
Piranha Bytes to my best knowledge never promised an automap for Gothic. They just designed their game differently and included maps that you could purchase from NPCs. They just took a totally different approach.
It doesn't seem to make sense to me to point that (= missing automap) out as a "flaw" of Gothic and then to ask people to be similarly forgiving about the same "flaw" (which -as I said- I don\t even consider a flaw but just a difference in design) in Dungeon Lords. |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:16 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
There's no people in towns because the monsters ate'em all...  |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:18 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
quote: Originally posted by yeesh
If DL's combat system or DL's skill system or DL's selection of magic items or DL's crafting system (such as it is) or DL's variety of monsters were 1/5th as good as Diablo II 1.10, the game would be an 7.5 - 8.0 even with empty rooms (who cares?), no changing your character's hair color (who cares?), and a missing map (annoying, but hardly the end of the world). Because it would be fun and rewarding to hack up all those 10-packs of monsters, instead of such a chore.
I propose that you elitists have to either a) go back and play through Diablo II 1.10 or b) quit badmouthing Diablo II, under penalty of banning for commenting on that which you do not know. Will there ever be an action/RPG which doesn't feature a million mouseclicks? No, yet DII is slammed for being a click-fest. How many games feature 7 different classes AND many COMPLETELY different builds carefully balanced within each class? And yet DII's character development system is panned as shallow. Has there ever been another single game made TO THIS DAY that can boast such a massive cast of unique items to find IN ADDITION to more or less infinite combinations of randomized stats on the hundreds (thousands?) of "normal" magic items? And yet DII is blasted, blasted, blasted.
Shame on you people. DII 1.10 is Blizzard's love-letter to the PC CRPG community, and it is awesome. It might not be your cup of tea, but perhaps you don't like killing monsters for loot and experience. And if that's not what a CRPG is about, then I've been gaming in the wrong genre. Plot, dialogue choices, ambient grass and leaves... that's all fine and well during rest periods, or for adventure games, but I'm not here to play Zork 2005; I'm here to kill stuff.
That's why characters have levels. Think about it and tell me I'm wrong.
Don't compare DL to DII. DII is fun, and that's why thousands of people are still playing it this very minute, a veritable lifetime after it came out. DL, well, it's not great. It's not a crime against humanity, but it's not fun either.
"""I propose that you elitists have to either a) go back and play through Diablo II 1.10 or b) quit badmouthing Diablo II, under penalty of banning for commenting on that which you do not know."""
Yeesh, all I can say is yeesh. Lets see what you know.
"""Will there ever be an action/RPG which doesn't feature a million mouseclicks? No, yet DII is slammed for being a click-fest."""
DL is slammed for being a click-fest. What makes clicking in one different from clicking in the other?
"""How many games feature 7 different classes AND many COMPLETELY different builds carefully balanced within each class?"""
D2 didn't have 7 differnt classes. And D2 didn't even have character creation, which is a requirment for any game that calls itself an rpg. How hard is it to balance damage over time vs. deflection? Its pretty damn easy when there isn't any character generation and classes are hard coded. And d20 did it with more classes and more choices and character generation. And I think d20 is one of the lighter, not a good example ones.
"""And yet DII's character development system is panned as shallow."""
Who said it was shallow? I said it was arbitrary.
"""Has there ever been another single game made TO THIS DAY that can boast such a massive cast of unique items to find IN ADDITION to more or less infinite combinations of randomized stats on the hundreds (thousands?) of "normal" magic items? And yet DII is blasted, blasted, blasted."""
Who cares? I like more realistic games. Would Rainbow Six be a better game if it had 50 billion weapons? Personaly I would rather have 10 solid and meaningful choices than 5 million arbitrary ones. Your post is pretty dramatic, dramatic, dramatic.
"""Shame on you people. DII 1.10 is Blizzard's love-letter to the PC CRPG community, and it is awesome."""
So since you like d2 no one should say anything bad about it because you feel that it is a good game that shouldn't be slammed. But a game you don't like can and should be slammed? Shame on you. DL could be HP's love letter to the pc crpg community. But since neither dl or d2 are rpgs I doubt it.
""" It might not be your cup of tea, but perhaps you don't like killing monsters for loot and experience."""
What this isn't in DL? Is this another missing feature of DL?
"""And if that's not what a CRPG is about, then I've been gaming in the wrong genre."""
Yeah you are. CRPGs are about bringing rpgs to the computer. Rpg stands for role playing game. Call of Cuthol is a role playing game and you can play it and never get in a fight, same with other role playing games. Role playing is about role playing. Its about creating a role with a set of rules in an imaginary world and setting out on an adventure and filling up a blank book with a story you created and centered in. Action games are about mindlessly killing hordes of enemies. That seems to be your genre.
"""That's why characters have levels. Think about it and tell me I'm wrong."""
You're wrong. U7, Harn, Riddle of Steel, VtM, and plenty of other games have no levels.
But I think that was poorly stated. You mean why they all have character advancement that is centered on and around combat with the other world interaction skills taking a second seat (bargaining, lockpicking, leadership, etc).
I could go into it but I'm sure you don't care as rpgs aren't your thing, but I agree that most rpgs are combat focused. Now it all comes down to what kind of combat you like. Heroic, realistic, cinematic, mindless, strategic, TB, RT? I like a certain kind of combat in rpgs, I like realistic, strategic, TB combat. That doesn't mean it is the best, as best, worst, etc are all opinions. You seem to like twitch action combat in action games. Thats fine, to each their own. It doesn't matter. What does matter and does help in an argument is research, forethought, and knowledge of the topic at hand.
I personally couldn't stand d2, but I did like and play wow for a while. I like the skill trees, and I like manipulating builds to get an edge. I spent as much time crunching numbers and testing out builds than I did killing monsters or other players. Blizzard games have a certain appeal to them and they seem simple but are a lot more complex under the surface. And best of all people are willing to give them a try, instead of just slamming them and being filled with hate and rage at the mear mention of their name, as which seems to happen with DL. If you don't like DL thats fine, but don't hold crap aginst it that is prominant in d2, everybody's favorite "rpg." And if you don't want the games you like to get slammed or have its faults brought to light, then don't slam other games people like, or at least judge the game fairly. |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:28 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
quote: Originally posted by Moriendor
I find it sort of bizarre that this is turning into Diablo 2 vs Dungeon Lords. You guys are comparing a five year old game to a game that has just been released.
That's like putting yourselves into the shoes of someone who played Diablo 2 five years ago, then fell into a coma, just woke up last week and you made him try Dungeon Lords.
Of course, that person might be slightly impressed by some of the things Dungeon Lords has to offer.
But what would the same person (like us "haters") think about Dungeon Lords if he had played Dungeon Siege, Gothic 1 & 2, Morrowind, Divinity, Neverwinter Nights, Star Wars KotOR 1&2 or even great non-RPGs like Half-Life 2, GTA etc. etc. in between?
Right. Totally different story. We "haters" have become used to a certain level of quality in games and this is even more true for those of us "haters" who do not play RPGs only but good or even excellent games from a variety of genres.
Dungeon Lords just doesn't live up to the expectations I have of a current game. In no department... [Opinion based on demo] .
On a different note and this is mostly directed at Roqua... I believe that Dhruin only listed features that Heuristic promised would be in the game. It's rather pointless IMHO to give examples of other games that had the missing Dungeon Lords features. That's like saying Dungeon Lords has elves and fairies but Half-Life 2 didn't and so Dungeon Lords must be superior .
That was not the point, I think. The point Dhruin tried to make was that Heuristic promised features that they didn't deliver.
Piranha Bytes to my best knowledge never promised an automap for Gothic. They just designed their game differently and included maps that you could purchase from NPCs. They just took a totally different approach.
It doesn't seem to make sense to me to point that (= missing automap) out as a "flaw" of Gothic and then to ask people to be similarly forgiving about the same "flaw" (which -as I said- I don\t even consider a flaw but just a difference in design) in Dungeon Lords.
I don't think the missing automap is a flaw of gothic or u7. I think automaps are a flaw in general. Unless they are tied to a skill like cartography in wiz 7 that improves with skill. I understand the missing feature argument, and I also understand that those features will be added. Mod tools came after ds release and I don't remember any reviewer banging them for this, same with battlegrounds and other crap in wow.
I don't think people are treating dl very fairly when compaired to other games and most of what I see is nonsense. No one has yet been able to tell me what makes the dungeons in DL old school but the same crap in new games doesn't make them old school. No one can articulate that point at all.
My biggest complaint is the share hate focused on dl. And people just destroying it without ever giving the game a fair shake. If you don't like it, thats fine, just treat it fairly. And the fact that most of the most hatefilled mongers have never bought the game and just spout out the hate rhetoric of others.
There are plenty of games I hate, like nwn, and crap like that. I keep my hate to myself because others enjoy the game and somehow somewhere I was taught to respect others and their opinions.
Lets say people saw the first half hour/hour of Doggville and then stopped watching and went on the internet and complained that it didn't have walls and props were in chalk outlines, and graphic glitches like people opening invisible doors, etc. And other movie fans jumped on board and every review of the movie above 40 was slammed for being unfair. And it was called old school for having acting in it and other nonsense.
When my wife put that movie on I hated it. I watched it because I made her watch shoalin soccer. But after about an hour I started getting into it, after two hours I didn't even notice that the houses were chalk outlines. When it was over I had just finished watching on of the best movies that I ever saw. I am so glad my wife made me watch that movie.
A good game, rpg or otherwise is immersive enough that that graphics don't matter, don't have to have rooms overflowing with furniture, and don't need towns filled with mobs (because npcs have a purpose, mobs dont) that say the same one line over and over. How are these people fed? They don't work? Why do they only say one thing if anything at all? Its not needed, just like real houses aren't needed in a movies or plays or the stage. Just like fancy graphics are needed to make avernum or geneforge good.
For some reason people hate dl, and they bring up nonsense to justify it when all they have to say, civily, is that they don't like it, instead of forcing lies and misconceptions on it. I don't like dl, and I'll defend the mistruths people charge it with just because I believe in fairness and the fact that HP had the balls to stick their neck out and try something non-mainstream. If I liked action games dl would probably be at the top of my "games I like" list, but I don't.
I don't like mount and blade and I'd defend that title also. I'd even defend d2 if everyone hated that game and pounced on it full of hate an unfairness, or even nwn. |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 11:00 pm |
|
|
yeesh
Keeper of the Gates

Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 113
Location: Unofficially representing Queens |
I feel like I have been caught in the path of a bullet post that was meant for someone else. I am not one of the people being overly critical of DL. I posted once, and only in the name of DII. I absolutely stand by my contention that anything DL does which is in the vein of DII it does less than 1/5th as well, and I stand by my contention that DL is not fun, although if you'd like I could modify that last part to read, "DL is not fun unless you have a very forgiving notion of fun". I'm allowed to feel that way because I've played it for hours and hours, and when I'm making the zillion mile trek across the empty (albeit pretty) wastelands to get from completely linear point A to point B and my computer freezes for a few seconds just before a pack of 8 death widows appears for the twelve trillionth time, I have a moment to reflect on how I'm not getting a kick out of this because the combat has no variety and the XP is irrelevant and there are no drops at all except for spider yolks, and I think I have enough of those thanks.
DII LoD 1.10 (which of course anyone into the game would be playing) does indeed have 7 classes to choose from when you start up, and while any balanced system of skills could be called "arbitrary", the selection of skills you make is critical to the way that character plays. The character development system in 1.10, with skill synergies, is rich and makes many different builds in each of those 7 classes viable, and a great number of them play uniquely. I still do not see this variety in any other single player RPG. A Hammerdin's playing is radically different from a Javazon, a Frenzy barbarian is a complete speedfreak as is a Feral Rage Werewolf with the proper skills, but their equipment requirements and weaknesses vary greatly. I actually haven't played in more than a year, so I'm out of examples, but go take a look at any website and you'll see a whole bunch of builds, and more importantly (if you read them (but really, I'm not hear assigning homework so just trust me)) you'll see that the actual play varies greatly for various builds. And that, once again, is a radical departure from most RPGs where the combat, despite all pretensions, is divided into smash up close and shoot arrows/fireballs/whatever in a straight line from far away.
My point is I don't have a point. What am I talking about here? My point is that I don't judge you, chumpy, so why are you judging me? I like to kill stuff, and I maintain that this is what an RPG is about. Do I have to drop names to get cred? I liked killing stuff in Wasteland, I liked killing stuff in the esteemed Gold Boxes, I liked killing stuff in M&M, I liked killing stuff in Fallout, I liked killing stuff in Planescape, I liked killing stuff in Ultima VI for some reason, I liked killing stuff in Morrowind, I liked killing stuff in BG, BGII, IWDII, NWN. I liked killing stuff in Disgaea, in Brigandine, in Ogre Battle, in Front Mission 4, in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance. I liked killing stuff in Wizards + Warriors, and I liked killing stuff in Wiz 8. Who knows what else I can't remember? I've killed plenty of stuff in my time, and if you haven't then once again I must misunderstand what genre this site is about. Why did you and I kill all that stuff?
Why, to level up, of course. That's what you do in CRPGs. That's the central mechanic. I'm glad you swerved around the semantic difference between levels and other forms of character development, but the part where you stop short of actually explaining why increasing your character(s)'s fighting power is NOT the central mechanic of every single CRPG, that was a little disappointing. Don't worry about boring me, you can go into it. I actually do have a fondness for RPGs, and I'd love to hear you explain "why they all have character advancement that is centered on and around combat with the other world interaction skills taking a second seat (bargaining, lockpicking, leadership, etc)." I'll tell you what I think: because that's what CRPGs are 100% (and with no apology) about. Everything else is just a pleasant diversion.
Explain the difference between a CRPG and an Adventure game.
Let me type that again: Explain the difference between a CRPG and an Adventure game.
I feel it has nothing to do with "playing a role", indeed, I think adventure games are more suited to that. In a CRPG, you're always playing the role of someone who hacks the hell out of everything that can give him/her some loot.
Explain why I'm wrong.
Diablo II is not only a game, but a litmus test of openmindedness. I remember when the orginal Diablo came out. I dismissed it immediately. I told my brother disdainfully that someone had come out with a "point and click RPG", and how lame was that?
But of course, once I played it I realized that it was fun. Really, really fun. Now I'm not advocating action games for everyone, but I've written all this because the reasons for the universal panning of DII on a lovable site like this are too often mixed together. 1) you don't like action games. Hey, that's your choice, but it obviously doesn't make action/RPGs bad. Duh. 2) you think Diablo's shallow. Well, I've just tried to explain why it's not shallow when it comes to combat and character development, and then I've just tried to explain why combat and character development are the key mechanics in the CRPG genre.
I'm apologizing right now because this ramble could really use some editing, and I'm out of time. But if anyone would like to explain the difference between a CRPG and an Adventure game, I think it would really light up the question of whetehr or not DII is a CRPG once and for all. And that sorta illumiation would be handy. |
Fri Jun 03, 2005 11:28 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
All right, I said this all before many many times but I'll do it again cause you took the time to explain your stance.
I agree 100% that in most crpgs all you do is engege in combat, and in most pen and paper rpgs most of the rules are about combat and how to handle combat. But I'll cover that later if you still want.
But in no pen and paper rpg's is combat ever decided or impacted in any way by my personal physical characteristics and not the physical characteristics of the character whose role I am playing. That goes against both the LAW of non-contradiction and the rule of consistency as I cannot play a character and play myself. Thats why SMB isn't an rpg.
Rpgs were invented so people could stop reading LotR over and over and start getting in to some adventures of their own. A wheelchair bound cripple could be a nimble and strong warrior, a fat pimple faced girl could be a beautiful elf bowmistress, and a less than bright teenager with no rights or control over his life could create and play a powerful super genious wizard who controls it all.
You could turn rpgs into an action game by deciding combat by rock'em sock'em robots but that would make it not an rpg. Maybe the players of a campaign don't like the ranged combat rules so they decide to shoot an elastic (or a rubber band if you are uncivilized and are not from massachusetts and call elastics that) at a can. When you gained a level you could move closer to the can making it easier to hit, and when you got a better weapon you could upgrade the elastic to a wrist rocket, then a bb gun, etc. But that would make it not an rpg, because you can't play a role and have the outcome of the characters physical feats decided by your own. Because you wouldn't be playing a role, you would be playing yourself.
You are not a lvl 7 warrior with knowledge of swords and other melee weapons with a strength of 16, etc. The warrior that you created, imbued with life and personality, and took control over is. You don't know the procise instant it is best to swing a sword, he does. You give him direction and the dice/mechanics/rules take over.
So any twitch game is an action game and connot ever be an rpg. It can be chock full o' rpg staples like character creation, blah blah, but it can never actually be an rpg. No one agrees with me, but my logic is infallible. So I'm right, and no one can tell me different, beyond that they don't agree with me. But I'm still right.
And just because I don't like d2 doesn't mean I have anything against it. I played Diablo 1 on the PS with a friend and we had a good time. I was hoping it would get him into real rpgs but it didn't, he likes action games. Maybe I would of liked d2 if a had a friend near me playing it with me, but I have it by myself and just clicking over and over wasn't enough for me. The towns were deserted , there was no engaging dialogue or dialogue options, the story was straight-shot linear, and as soon as you walked outside of town you became bombarded with a billion super easy to kill enemies that poored at you in a never ending stream. Skill trees weren't enough of a hook to keep me going. But I didn't log on to the internet and flame on, I just thought how the fake rpg genre is going down the toilet and then probably thought about naked girls, because thats how I like em.
But let me ask everyone this, The console Baldur's Gate games both were received and loved and got high review scores, but are almost unplayable to me. They are shallow, slow, easy, linear, and contain nothing that makes a good game besides not being buggy. Where were all the angry, hate-filled posters then? Saving your rage for the little developers? |
Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:52 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land

Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
Where to start... hate mongering, Roqua? I think that's being melodramatic. The only reason I entered the thread was because Garrett (for whom I have immense respect) seemed to imply that players are complaining about Dungeon Lords just for the sake of complaining -- and I rather disagree. The 'net is full of jerks (always has been and always will be) who I'm sure are ready to pounce on any train wreck for their own amusement but this is one game in my opinion that deserves every bit of derision. It has nothing to do with being the little guy. In fact, Bradley's name carries (or did, anyway) some weight that the real little guys could only dream of and they suffer a worse fate: many gamers simply ignore their games and they fade into obscurity.
As a generalisation, RPGs are played for some combination of these elements:
- Character development
- Combat
- Exploration
- Story
- NPC interaction
- World interaction
Individuals will give each of these traits different weights. Likewise, some games will have strengths in some areas and not others, however, a game that succeeds in one or more of these areas will generally find an audience.
My problems with Dungeon Lords have absolutely nothing to do with the lack of a map - I couldn't care less. It's the core gameplay that is inadequate in my opinion but when you add the technical problems and missing features, it becomes even worse.
The character development fails because it trades breadth for depth. Dungeon Lords pretty much forces a mixed character. Want to play a melee fighter? You get the only combos at level 5, with nothing to work to after that. Result? Players get bored and start adding magic. Oh, you'll have to add thiefing abilities because there are critical quests that require you to open chests and there's no other way to do it (can't get the key elsewhere, for example).
Want to play a mage? You'll soon find the magic systems are ill thought-out for the respawning combat and you'll have to add some melee abilities to survive. Don't forget to add the thieving abilities.
Want to play a thief? There's no stealth, no back-stab multipliers or anything like that and ranged weapons are ineffective -- but at least you voluntarily chose to have the thieving abilities. Now to add the melee combat so you survive and the magic when you get bored.
I'll grant the idea of playing a celestial-samurai-rogue-ninja (and yes, I made that up) is interesting on paper but in practice it all produces similar characters. If I want to specialise, there's just not enough depth unless you are satisfied with one combo attack if you choose to be a fighter.
All this means there's little "roleplaying", even in a simplistic Diablo-like different-ways-to-deal-damage way. I think there are some interesting ideas but it fails on execution. Character creation ends up with a mediocre mark at best.
The combat is the best part...for a while. It's repetitive because of the lack of combos and lack of good long-term character development options -- and because of the spawns. Some well-designed encounters instead of endless spawns would have made it better but it's a start.
Exploration. There are some interesting dungeons but the overland map is deathly dull with nothing worth exploring but a couple of random chests. Yay. The terrain is basically identical one end to the other and there are no encounters other than the story quests. Sorry, it fails on this count.
Story? Well, it couldn't be more generic but it's mostly killed by the cardboard-cutout NPCs. Given the heavy emphasis on the strength of the story by Bradley I think it's disappointing.
NPC Interaction? There isn't any.
World interaction? There's really isn't much. The only interactive elements are the dungeon puzzles and perhaps gathering Nether katals. Otherwise, players have zero input in how the story unfolds.
So, for me Dungeon Lords gets mediocre marks for combat and character development and basically nothing else. Then add the empty world, unfinished/missing features and bugs.
Each of the other games you mentioned, Roqua, actually succeeds at one or more of the elements I mentioned above. You certainly don't have to develop a fighter/mage/thief in DivDiv (although you can if you want to) because the skill trees are quite deep. If I want to develop a pure mage or pure melee fighter, there's satisfying depth. Not to mention a fully developed world bla bla bla. Arx didn't have dialogue? So? It succeeded in creating an interesting world to explore. Diablo succeeds with a very deep skill tree whether you acknowledge it or not.
As for whether I should expect these things from Dungeon Lords, I'll let Bradley speak for himself from one of our own interviews:
quote:
RPGDot: As for gameplay and interface: Is there an automap, a journal and a quest book? Are there multiple choice dialogues?
DW Bradley: Yes, of course! Dungeon Lords is very involved story-wise, and is a fairly massive world, it would be a crime to expect anyone to keep up with everything without these kinds of helpful features. If by "multiple choice dialogs" you are asking whether there is game branching based upon player's choice of response to dialog, then yes, absolutely…
So, a "crime" he says. I won't add insult to injury by quoting how his 20 years experience enables him to build the depth hardcore characters want, or how the world varies with snowfields and so on, or how there will be dialogue trees, how the world continues without the player, the 100s of NPCs or (laughably) the possibility of mounts.
From my perspective, it is perfectly fair to judge Dungeon Lords by the standard Bradley himself set. I just don't see how that is complaining. Neverthless, I could overlook all that if Dungeon Lords only suffered from its own mediocrity of design, rather than the myriad of bugs and unfinished items in addition. _________________ Editor @ RPGDot |
Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:33 am |
|
|
Guest
|
"""hate mongering, Roqua? I think that's being melodramatic?"""
Yes
"""The only reason I entered the thread was because Garrett (for whom I have immense respect) seemed to imply that players are complaining about Dungeon Lords just for the sake of complaining -- and I rather disagree."""
I agree with him, a lot of people who never bought the game and never will spout out nonsense about it. Your quote from Bradley is kind of disarming against retorts but that never stopped me before and moma didn't raise no quiter. Most of the complaints still are prominent in other games and no one complained about them in them. There is a huge difference in critiquing with back-up as you did, and spouting angry hateful and wrong nonsense. I liked the combat less in all the other aqction games than I did in DL, it doesn't mean they're better or worse, same with advancement. different people like different things thats where that whole tolerance concept comes in. Should we hate gays and flame them because they like to stick their junk in differnt junk than we do? Live and let live I say. Hate leads to the dark side Dhruin, or should I say Darth (am I being melodramatic again?)
DL has combos, Arx didn't as well as a billion other games. Mortal Kombat has a bunch of them though. I haven't played d2 in a while but I don't remember combos in it.
And you left my favorite rpg REQUIRMENT out of the generalisation list, which would be character generation. I loves it.
And I'd like to quote from a Diablo 2 developer that I interviewed:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roqua: Will Diablo 2 have dialogue choices, character generation, non-linear story, and strategic combat aimed at adults?
Diablo 2 developer: Do I love to fondle children's genitalia? Yes of course!!!!! Dude I love it, dude. Totally awesome and radical. Diablo 2 is like going to the beach and saying Surfs Up and then ripping the shredding waves all day dude. Wicked hella phat dog. Its the shiznizzy my wizzy. What kind of rpg woul diablo be without those dude. Read me lips it will have all those things dude.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I rest my case Dhruin. |
Sat Jun 04, 2005 7:05 am |
|
|
Priest4hire
Head Merchant


Joined: 08 May 2002
Posts: 52
Location: Slocan, BC |
quote:
And you left my favorite rpg REQUIRMENT out of the generalisation list, which would be character generation. I loves it.
One word: Dragonlance.
It is disingenuous to compare a single element of one game with a single element of another. A game is not good or bad compared to some other game but instead it must be compared to itself. It is the balance of the gameplay itself that determines how important various aspects of the game are. No one bashes Wizardry VII for not having NPC scheduling or item interaction like Ultima VII because that wasn't the focus of Wiz VII. Likewise I would never bash Dungeon Lords on the basis that the combat isn't as deep as that of Ninja Gaiden. One good reason to have an action/RPG hybrid genre is that it clearly separates games like DL from games like NG.
I do agree that separation of player abilities and character abilities is key to RPGs. However I also believe that the action/RPG is a perfectly valid hybrid genre because it is just that: a hybrid genre. Suggesting there is a hard line between action and CRPG is to create a false dichotomy. Even in true RPGs player skill is required to succeed. That one complains of combat not being challenging enough is proof of that. That challenge you crave is challenge for the player not the character. It is the player's strategic and tactical skills, not the character's, that are being tested. Perhaps the easy combat of Knights of the Old Republic is actually truer to the RPG ideal then? After all, it is the skills of the characters that matter is it not? Of course that makes for dull gameplay.
Now getting back to Dungeon Lords. I agree that the character creation system is not as good as it first seems. The game offers something like 30 character classes and loads of skills. At first it really seems like it's deep and interesting. Only as I've played more it seems like the system starts to lose its appeal. I have about 2.5 million advancement points and though I'm partly saving them for when I get Crusader class I also am just not sure what to spend them on.
Weapon skills seem pointless since I have no idea what I might gain by pumping them up. Likewise armor skills only seem good for reducing penalties and so if I don't have any what's the point? Magic is expensive and besides I can pretty much cast the spells I have in the schools I practice anyway. I can pump stats but the connection between stats and actual performance seem tenuous at best. I have over 200 speed and yet don't attack any much quicker than when I had 40 - unless I walk backwards in which case my guy does the overhead slash like he's The Flash.
Between skills and stats being outright broken and skills and stats being very vague on the benefit of increasing them there just isn't much thrill in spending points later on. What good are 30 some classes if they all end up being the same? The same with all the skills. If there's no apparent benefit to specializing heavily in weapons then why do it? As a result the whole character building aspect just peters out after a while. It's as though they never got around to working out the character building for the latter half of the game.
I find Dungeon Lords to be deeply frustrating. I'm a D.W. Bradley fan from a long while back and I've played all his games. DL has many positive aspects and it feels like it could be great. But there are also so very many issues. Excepting the broken parts of the game it isn't that there's a singular crushing problem. Rather it's all of the issue put together that weigh it down. Just one or two wouldn't be a big deal but the more I play the more apparent they become and the harder it is to overlook them.
Hell, the game even has water with hills in it. That is, the water itself goes up and down as though it were the convolutions of land. Swimming uphill is really bizarre. I'm not saying that by itself it's a big deal. But this lack of polish, often in an inexplicable manner, seems par for the course of this game. The game just keeps rubbing my nose in the problematic issues.
I can't deny I've enjoyed what I've played so far - to an extent at least. But it's becoming harder to keep at it. It is so frustrating when one cool idea after another is promptly undermined by bugs, missing features, or just plain poor execution. _________________ Watch your back. Shoot straight. Conserve ammo. And never, ever, cut a deal with a dragon.
Grammaton Dragon
-==(UDIC)==- |
Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:39 am |
|
|
corwin
On the Razorblade of Life

Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 8376
Location: Australia |
DL is frustrating, enjoyable, yet somehow disappointing all at the same time. It could have been so much more, but the sum of its parts is far less than was promised. In that sense, there is an element of betrayal at work. Like Dhruin, I don't really care about all the missing 'liitle' things. Sure I wish they had been there; it would have improved the quality of the game, but I can live without them if the game is fun to play.
Fun is a personal experience, and after years of playing games, it's also relative. I knew what I was buying when I ordered DL (I'd played the Demo) yet I bought it anyway, even though action RPG's are NOT my favourite. As an action RPG hybrid, it's does what I expected and I'm enjoying that. As a deep thought provoking RPG, it fails miserably. However, that's NOT what the game is pretending to be.
The bottom line for me, is while this game is buggy, unfinished, etc, etc, it still has redeeming features and I have enjoyed what I have played so far. Would I recommend others buy it? Not till everything is fixed and then only if they enjoy this type of game. Do I feel I have wasted my money? No, the only game I've ever totally hated as a waste of time and money, was PoR2. IT'S a GAME enjoy it for what it is, not for what it isn't, or even for what it could have been. Life's too short to get upset over a game!!  _________________ If God said it, then that settles it!
I don't use Smileys, I use Emoticons!!
 |
Sun Jun 05, 2005 2:17 am |
|
|
the mighty stamar
High Emperor


Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 602
Location: arcata ca, humboldt county |
Ive enjoyed dungeon lords, particulrly the dungeons. They seem to be mostly complete.
The areas of the three towns are incomplete, and I would say the overland part of the game. I didnt enjoy those parts so much lol. I just had a long stretch between dungeons from ulm to naga temple, and I did lots of walking.... and it was damn boring and time consuming. It was sort of like stretches of morrowind with long walks fed exing except... it was even less interesting. Now that Im back in a dungeon and dealing with puzzles the game is really cool again. So its worth it just for that I think but Im not going to call the game excellent because it has good parts or terrible because it has bad parts....
Wizards and warriors was more complete. And it had a few missing features eg traits you couldnt get, horses that didnt do anything, some endings had just blank screens..... etc.... I liked wizards and warriors a lot I give it around 75% and a could have been better. I dont think Ill end up giving dungeon lords that high a mark because although parts are even better its even less complete. |
Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:39 am |
|
|
Nephillim
Guest
|
Pages and pages of proclamations and flames. Yet none of you imbeciles have seen the proverbial light!!!!
The programmers, producers and marketers were so fucking money hungry, that they released an uncomplete and unfinished product.
Thus, while you have all paid for the game and are now complaining about the delivered product, THEY ARE running to the bank to deposit your hard earned money.
Bottom line....we have all been fucked up the ass with no vasoline or forwarning.
Who wins? Coporate America.
Secret of the trade.... stop talking and posting about it, and coporate america will fight back by a) releasing a patch with the promised goods and bug fixes. And b) will release DL 2 in a year and a half with the real mcoy.
I probably wont be back to these forums so you can praise or hail me at orousseau@gmail.com
Be my guest, but if you feel like flaming, make sure you have a high enough IQ to at least challenge me.
Nephillim |
Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:26 am |
|
|
Johrgamesh
Guest
|
yeesh
Don`t you think it`s pretty lame to compare fully patched and balanced product like Diablo II v1.10 and initial release or even v1.1 of Dungeon Lords?
Perhaps we should wait for more patches? Forget missing features like map, character customization and missing furniture. Perhaps they`ll succeed in balancing character advancement, perhaps they`ll even add some nice background tunes to the game… And just perhaps we`ll get a fun old school dungeon romp Dungeon Lords supposed to be.  |
Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:13 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:54 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|