First review out out from GI: mixed but overall positive.

[Disasterrific]

Exploiting the AI seems more like a feature of the combat system than a problem with it, as long as each enemy has its own character.

Not to get defensive, but not all reviewers are the best players, some of the difficulty with the front row getting slaughtered could be down to poor skill choices and not finding enough equipment so I'm taking it with a pinch of salt.

My one concern is that each would feel the same to fight only more hit-points, a concern that the videos so far seem to show as unjustified.

[luthur1964]

Exploiting the AI seems more like a feature of the combat system than a problem with it, as long as each enemy has its own character.

Not to get defensive, but not all reviewers are the best players, some of the difficulty with the front row getting slaughtered could be down to poor skill choices and not finding enough equipment so I'm taking it with a pinch of salt.

My one concern is that each would feel the same to fight only more hit-points, a concern that the videos so far seem to show as unjustified.

I agree, only I'm adding in a full bag of salt.

[krayzkrok]

Dungeon Master (and hence LoG) had a different approach to combat. A lot of the early Wizardry / Bards Tale / M&M games in that era had combat that locked you into the fight. So once you engaged, your party had better be capable of dealing with it. Dungeon Master did things different. You weren't locked in, the ability to move, flee, get a better position, etc, these were all quite viable strategies. Of course you could abuse the system by kiting, and dodging around the side, and leading monsters under gates, but I always thought that was part of the fun, part of the strategies you could employ. You could abuse it, of course, just the same way you can abuse quicksaving in games today, but if you want to go that route then you have no excuse.

So reading that review, I get the impression the reviewer was after the kind of combat that you'd get when locked in to a fight. But if you go mano-a-mano with the critters in Dungeon Master you'd often end up dying a quick death. So in that respect, I think LoG continues that great tradition.

[jfunk]

Dungeon Master (and hence LoG) had a different approach to combat. A lot of the early Wizardry / Bards Tale / M&M games in that era had combat that locked you into the fight. So once you engaged, your party had better be capable of dealing with it. Dungeon Master did things different. You weren't locked in, the ability to move, flee, get a better position, etc, these were all quite viable strategies. Of course you could abuse the system by kiting, and dodging around the side, and leading monsters under gates, but I always thought that was part of the fun, part of the strategies you could employ. You could abuse it, of course, just the same way you can abuse quicksaving in games today, but if you want to go that route then you have no excuse.

So reading that review, I get the impression the reviewer was after the kind of combat that you'd get when locked in to a fight. But if you go mano-a-mano with the critters in Dungeon Master you'd often end up dying a quick death. So in that respect, I think LoG continues that great tradition.

I must admit, all other things being equal I prefer the Wizardry way. I can be a bit clumsy when things get hectic, so turn-based is a bit more my speed. But I've loved games using both systems, so I can go either way.

[anfauglir]

Maybe he's missing the guillotine-door thingy, so will I.

[bam65]

I'm also more of a turn-based combat person myself, although I have played real-time combat rpgs in the past. I figure what the hell though, it's only $12.

[Mychaelh]

Dungeon Master / Eye of Beholder (...and LoG) style combat makes more fun, when one actually has to draw the level maps by hand ('old school') because party position change and one can get lost. Fights have to be planned beforehand, and when you take your view away from the screen to draw the map, there is a chance to get attacked. Wizardry/Bards Tale style combat is more easy, but also more boring when it comes to old-school map drawing.

[jfunk]

Dungeon Master / Eye of Beholder (...and LoG) style combat makes more fun, when one actually has to draw the level maps by hand ('old school') because party position change and one can get lost. Fights have to be planned beforehand, and when you take your view away from the screen to draw the map, there is a chance to get attacked. Wizardry/Bards Tale style combat is more easy, but also more boring when it comes to old-school map drawing.

Well that combat doesn't necessarily have to be "easier", it's just different. The combat must be balanced differently for the two styles (which is why it can't be toggled on and off as some have wondered). Combat should be balanced in a game LoG to REQUIRE moving/dodging. If it isn't, then combat will be trivialized for those that do move. Turn-based style must be balanced on statistics and character ability use alone.

Being a somewhat clumsy fool, I prefer turn based as it eliminates my real life physical talent from the equation.

[luthur1964]

I love the DM and LoG style combat because I feel it is a good middle-ground between turn-based (which I also love) and the more modern first person shooters (which have become quite redundant, but still some good ones out there). I'm hoping this style will catch on by players who least expect it, provided they take a chance and buy this gem.