• Re: The Passing of the Mad Overlord

    From Mike S.@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Sep 1 08:15:32 2024
    On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 16:40:31 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <[email protected]> wrote:

    Classic CRPG fans, take note of this sad day. Andrew C. Greenberg, one
    of the two co-developers of "Wizardry", has passed on.

    I'll admit it; I never cared much for the Wizardry series. They were
    too focused on the mechanical aspects of the RPG genre --the stats,
    the loot, the combat-- and not enough on the bits I actually cared
    for: story, world-building and characters. They often were ruthlessly
    hard too; 'git-gud, scrub' games long before Dark Souls made that a
    meme. I played games for entertainment, not challenge.

    The git-gud Wizardry was Wizardry IV. I lost my patience with that one
    and gave up. Apparently, everyone else did as well as it was the worst
    selling Wizardry title. The earlier ones (and the fifth one) are very
    easy by comparison.

    I still have yet to play 6-8. I really should get on it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Werner P.@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 2 08:17:20 2024
    Am 01.09.24 um 20:16 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
    Were the Wizardry games actually/harder/ than "Bards Tale" or "Ultima
    I"? Maybe not. Like I said, I'm not enough of an expert on those games
    to really say. But my subjective experience was that they felt a lot
    less forgiving.
    Well Bards Tale was at least unfair (the first title) it let you choose
    a party without a Bard and then you failed miserably without it in the
    last dungeon before finish...

    But I think Bards Tale sold well due to its visuals, it simply had the
    best visuals for any RPG of its time back then. Wizardry until Bradley
    took over the series always had dated graphics. They were fine when part
    1 came out, but they kept the same engine without significant visual improvements until including part 4. Part 5 was a bradley game renamed
    to wizardry, Part 6 was the first real wizardry under Bradleys rule!

    Btw. hardly an expert myself never played any of the Wizardries, but
    thats what I gathered about those games on the net!

    Btw Unlike Ultime which was killed by EA, Wizardry still lives, the
    series just went to japan over various really obscure paths, and new
    Wizardry games are developed there which now slowly make their way back
    to the West!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Justisaur@21:1/5 to Spalls Hurgenson on Wed Sep 4 09:24:47 2024
    On 8/31/2024 1:40 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

    Classic CRPG fans, take note of this sad day. Andrew C. Greenberg, one
    of the two co-developers of "Wizardry", has passed on.

    I'll admit it; I never cared much for the Wizardry series. They were
    too focused on the mechanical aspects of the RPG genre --the stats,
    the loot, the combat-- and not enough on the bits I actually cared
    for: story, world-building and characters. They often were ruthlessly
    hard too; 'git-gud, scrub' games long before Dark Souls made that a
    meme. I played games for entertainment, not challenge.

    But that the Wizardry games had a huge influence on the hobby is
    undeniable, and the Wizardry games were some of the first complex
    CRPGs to have any real success. They helped prove the medium was for
    more than just shooting and jumping. And the Wizardry games were
    complex, not only with huge (for its time) maps but multiple character classes, dozens of spells and numerous character classes which could radically change how your game played out.

    How much of Wizardry was Greenberg's influence over his co-creator's,
    Robert Woodhead, is unclear. Greenberg left the PC entertainment
    software in the late 80s, shortly after Wizardry IV's release. But he
    remains part of the heart and soul of the games; after all, the
    big-bad of the series, the Mad Overlord Werdna, is Andrew spelled backwards...

    It's odd I never got into the series. I am more of a tactical mechanics
    combat lover in RPGs and it seems like it was right up my alley.
    Perhaps it was just lack of funds when Wizardry was in it's heyday, for
    now I don't have any nostalgia for it, and have mostly moved on from
    turn based combat.

    --
    -Justisaur

    ø-ø
    (\_/)\
    `-'\ `--.___,
    ¶¬'\( ,_.-'
    \\
    ^'

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mike S.@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 4 14:38:25 2024
    On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 09:24:47 -0700, Justisaur <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    It's odd I never got into the series. I am more of a tactical mechanics >combat lover in RPGs and it seems like it was right up my alley.
    Perhaps it was just lack of funds when Wizardry was in it's heyday, for
    now I don't have any nostalgia for it, and have mostly moved on from
    turn based combat.

    I didn't have nostalgia for Wizardry either, I missed it the first
    time around. I got around to playing the first three (and eventually
    the 5th entry) a number of years ago. I enjoyed them a lot but I do
    like Might & Magic more. Proving Grounds has a remake available on
    Steam.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Werner P.@21:1/5 to All on Fri Sep 6 15:38:05 2024
    Am 04.09.24 um 16:30 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
    (Infocom was betting big on creating a relational database) and their
    ongoing financial issues (because people didn't want to buy games
    without pretty graphics) pretty much sealed their fate.
    Cornerstone had a design 10 years ahead of its time basically not really runnable on computers back then with a decent performance. To my
    knowledge the RDB was basically programmed in a lisp like language just
    like their games running on a VM.
    This worked for them for the games because they just needed to port the
    VM (z-engine) to another platform and could release all their games so
    far on it.
    But for the database it was a hog, the db was dog slow compared to
    d-base which was the standard relational db for the market they were
    aiming for, it was dead from the beginning and dragged them down!
    They had to sell out after the corner stone fiasco to Activison which
    was their end!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Werner P.@21:1/5 to All on Fri Sep 6 15:52:40 2024
    Am 06.09.24 um 15:38 schrieb Werner P.:
    Am 04.09.24 um 16:30 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
    (Infocom was betting big on creating a relational database) and their
    ongoing financial issues (because people didn't want to buy games
    without pretty graphics) pretty much sealed their fate.
    Cornerstone had a design 10 years ahead of its time basically not really runnable on computers back then with a decent performance. To my
    knowledge the RDB was basically programmed in a lisp like language just
    like their games running on a VM.
    This worked for them for the games because they just needed to port the
    VM (z-engine) to another platform and could release all their games so
    far on it.
    But for the database it was a hog, the db was dog slow compared to d-
    base which was the standard relational db for the market they were
    aiming for, it was dead from the beginning and dragged them down!
    They had to sell out after the corner stone fiasco to Activison which
    was their end!

    here is a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNNRXH_mWn8

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)