Grimrock

I actually find it pretty fun. But I wish we could spend more time looking at the environment and enemies during combat rather than at the UI.

It's actually pretty satisfying getting a good rhythm down for attacking and casting your spells, then watch the monsters blow up.

Demo_Seeker wrote:

petri wrote: The intention of the combat and magic in LoG is to test player's skills, like reaction times, motoric coordination and tactical thinking, as well as characters skills (miss chance, damage inflicted etc.). There are many RPGs out there that focus only on tactical gameplay. For example, the old gold box games are prime examples of this. With LoG we aimed for a different kind of experience.

Do you seriously think that "Who can click better/faster on small GUI elements" is an interesting challenge which adds anything of value to a role playing game?
I sure do not.

Well, your straw man argument aside, I would have to say the Petri made an excellent point. The game is very fun in popular opinion, so obviously the uniqueness of the game brought something to the table.

Demo_Seeker wrote:Do you seriously think that "Who can click better/faster on small GUI elements" is an interesting challenge which adds anything of value to a role playing game?

LoG is a dungeon crawler which mixes tactical elements from RPGs and realtime elements from action games. It's a matter of opinion if one likes this combination or not. I think that the realtime elements work pretty well in LoG but my opinion is of course strongly biased.

There's always room for improvements but changing the magic system to, for example, use hotkeys or a list of spells to click on, is not something I would like in a realtime dungeon crawler.

(the situation would of course be completely different if LoG was turn based)

Well said Petri!
I'm in the opinion of, if LoG were hot keyed or turn based or spam an attack key, I wouldn't play or buy.

petri wrote:Thanks for the feedback

We wanted to create an experience that tests the skills of the characters and also of the player. For example, the puzzles are designed so that the player is the one who solves them, not the characters. The intention of the combat and magic in LoG is to test player's skills, like reaction times, motoric coordination and tactical thinking, as well as characters skills (miss chance, damage inflicted etc.). There are many RPGs out there that focus only on tactical gameplay. For example, the old gold box games are prime examples of this. With LoG we aimed for a different kind of experience.

Petri is absolutely right. You dont understand the success of this game? I dont understand the success of most of the AAA games that are released today. I played some of them and they are completely BORING. In most of them you just watch some stupid FILMS and after a long time the game lets you click twice with your fingers and than you have again watch tons of stupid animations!!! Most of modern games are FILMS and not computer games. I understand the success of LOG because it is a GAME. All the monsters you must kill by yourself, all the puzzles you must solve by yourself and it is a lot of fun!

tantalan wrote:I dont understand the success of most of the AAA games that are released today.

"Instant gratification".

Demo_Seeker wrote:

petri wrote: The intention of the combat and magic in LoG is to test player's skills, like reaction times, motoric coordination and tactical thinking, as well as characters skills (miss chance, damage inflicted etc.). There are many RPGs out there that focus only on tactical gameplay. For example, the old gold box games are prime examples of this. With LoG we aimed for a different kind of experience.

Do you seriously think that "Who can click better/faster on small GUI elements" is an interesting challenge which adds anything of value to a role playing game?
I sure do not.

There is also the fact that the game is a deliberate throw-back to the Dungeon Master (and possibly 'Eye of the Beholder') series and style of games; so that puts heavy influence on clicking GUI elements; and what they said and intended, is almost exactly what's expected, and how it should be. I thought they did a superb job; LoG is among my top five in the genre.

tantalan wrote:I dont understand the success of most of the AAA games that are released today. I played some of them and they are completely BORING. In most of them you just watch some stupid FILMS and after a long time the game lets you click twice with your fingers and than you have again watch tons of stupid animations!!! Most of modern games are FILMS and not computer games.

I understand it, but well done Cutscenes are not what I don't like about them. I'm generally one who plays the game to reach the next cutscene; not to say that I'd not play if there were none, but I usually enjoy them when I come to them. I would have preferred it if LoG had had an animated intro, mid-game, and ending cutscenes. The ones they had were fine, and set the scene, but even Eye of the Beholder had an animated intro (and outro) for that; good ones too.

Question, to the Topic Starter:

It will may sounds like some sort of disrespect, but how old are you?
Did you ever played till nights in old stile RPG on a IBM PC 286/386/486 computers, on a 4/16/32 colors monitors, withous cool sound ( exepct luckt ones, who had a 8-bit sound blaster ) such as
Dungeon Master, Eye of Beholder, Lands of Lore, Menzobaranien e.t.c ?

If you not, that i can tell you onestly - you will never understand, why this game have such big success...

I don't have those experiences, and I still love the game.

I think the game is just what it says it is, an old school dungeon crawler, no pretenses to be anything else.

If I were to make any suggestions or comments they would most likely be along the lines of a little bit better tutorial on the basic interface. It took me to level 3 before I figured out I didn't need to have a scroll in my hand to cast spells.

I do believe the the skill sets could be a bit more varied, seeing as a lot of the old school skill sets, especially the pen & paper games, could get quite in depth.

But overall I am enjoying the heck out of this game even though I haven't been able to get past level 6.

What I don't understand though, and find a bit frustrating, is why it seems to need a good system to run well. It seems like graphics wise there isn't much to write home about, really doesn't seem like much more than the old Doom games, but with only on board graphics my system struggles.

Also I might add the Dungeon editor make the price worth it even if I never see level 7.