Poll

What is Your Favorite Gold-Box Game?

Pool of Radiance
5 (33.3%)
Curse of the Azure Bonds
2 (13.3%)
Secret of the Silver Blades
1 (6.7%)
Pools of Darkness
1 (6.7%)
Champions of Krynn
1 (6.7%)
Death Knights of Krynn
2 (13.3%)
Dark Queen of Krynn
1 (6.7%)
Gateway to the Savage Frontier
0 (0%)
Treasures of the Savage Frontier
0 (0%)
Buck Rogers XXV: Countdown to Doomsday
1 (6.7%)
Buck Rogers XXV: Matrix Cubed
1 (6.7%)

Total Members Voted: 14

Voting closed: February 24, 2009, 12:38:05 PM

Author Topic: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?  (Read 10825 times)

Offline ghaaroth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #45 on: July 13, 2010, 04:53:26 PM »
My point was that the game (yes, the game being Buck Rogers: Countdown to Doomsday) is for the Genesis, not for the NES.

Ah, got it. Those consoles, they are all the same to me :D

Offline Kaz-Keith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #46 on: July 13, 2010, 04:59:51 PM »
Quite so. Order of the Griffon plays like a typical low-level GB game, while Warriors of Eternal Sun is sort of a cross between Dark Sun and Eye of the Beholder (IIRC it had turn-based tactical combat for outdoors in 3rd person, yet realtime combat indoors in 1st person, go figure what they thought)

Agreed - what was the deal with picking your party members from a preset roster for Order of the Griffon?  I remember the same gimmick with Dungeon Master(s), but I am a visual person and mostly picked due to the picture of the character rather than from all the noisy numbers and whatnot, resulting in a less-than-stellar party roster.  The magical items you could find/buy were pretty neat, as were the monster types that you encountered.  My favorite combat encounter was the one where one of the many antagonists freed the zoo creatures which then promptly attacked you and each other in mass.  Quite a fight.  :)

Offline ghaaroth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #47 on: July 13, 2010, 05:10:21 PM »
Agreed - what was the deal with picking your party members from a preset roster for Order of the Griffon?

In an age when they made you write down "level codes" for games rather than save their state, I guess a honest character generator couldn't be present in a game not running on a real computer :)

Now, why those games were never released for PC, beats me.

Offline Olivier Leroux

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2314
  • Yip, yip, yip!
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #48 on: July 13, 2010, 07:39:59 PM »
I am a visual person and mostly picked due to the picture of the character rather than from all the noisy numbers and whatnot, resulting in a less-than-stellar party roster.

 :D I can totally relate to that. Looks like Eye of the Griffon was using EOB character portraits, btw.

Offline GoldBoxFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1708
  • "We need more cowbell."
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #49 on: September 27, 2010, 10:48:22 PM »
Buck Rogers: Matrix Cubed. Only gold box game I completed without ever having the whole party die and then reloading.

Offline hans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #50 on: September 27, 2010, 11:34:14 PM »
Buck Rogers: Matrix Cubed. Only gold box game I completed without ever having the whole party die and then reloading.
 

PCs didn't die in Buck Rogers, right?  They just went comatose.  Then they had to be ressurected, er, --I mean revived, at a temple, er, --I mean a hospital...   :P

Offline GoldBoxFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1708
  • "We need more cowbell."
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #51 on: September 28, 2010, 12:02:10 PM »
Buck Rogers: Matrix Cubed. Only gold box game I completed without ever having the whole party die and then reloading.
 

PCs didn't die in Buck Rogers, right?  They just went comatose.  Then they had to be ressurected, er, --I mean revived, at a temple, er, --I mean a hospital...   :P
I thought they could die. If you go to -10, or you don't bandage. But I never lost anyone that way either. Not so in Countdown to Doomsday. Or any other gold box. I was really careful in BR:MC. I started playing BR:MC to get the text for a possible conversion to NWN1 using the D20 Modern Hakpacks. I just got to my first ship. Haven't gotten back to finishing it again so don't know if you can die. (I just played a bit. You can go into a coma and that's it unless the whole party is defeated.)

Offline sunwukong

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #52 on: June 01, 2013, 12:28:38 PM »

Quite so. Order of the Griffon plays like a typical low-level GB game, while Warriors of Eternal Sun is sort of a cross between Dark Sun and Eye of the Beholder (IIRC it had turn-based tactical combat for outdoors in 3rd person, yet realtime combat indoors in 1st person, go figure what they thought)


Order of the Griffon is not too bad. I'm playing it at the moment (at the same time I'm playing PoD). The should have made that Dragonlance game for NES the same way as OotG instead of the side scrolling thing they produced.

The Screen of OotG is a bit strange. Sometimes Your fourth character's mugshot at the bottom gets cut off. But in the rest/camp screen it's fine. 

I played Warriors of the eternal sun before ( after replacing the coin battery in the cart) I liked the game as well but I didn't finish it because of the castle where the monsters hitting you in battle took away experience points (in a HUGE way) 

Offline ag87

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #53 on: October 08, 2015, 05:45:25 AM »
Hi,

I hope it is ok to post here.  I know the poll says it closed long ago, but I see people posted long after that.  So I thought I would add my 2 cents, seeings how I just completed these games and I wasn't around when the poll was done originally.  If I've made a mistake in posting here, please forgive me (I know some people have strong feelings about posting to older threads, but hopefully it is ok in this case).

Anyway, what I thought was the best, in order (favorite being PoR): PoR, TotSF, GttSF, DKK, CoK, DQoK, PoD, CotAB, SotSB, Heirs.  I haven't yet played the BR games, but I plan on doing so in the very near future.

PoR: I think this was fresh and seemed to fit the original design of the engine the best of the series.  I really liked the idea of reclaiming areas and the series of missions and such.  The outdoor system was a good fit for my tastes, kind of vaguely reminding me of the Ultima games (Ultima IV was and still is my favorite game ever).  Anyway, I originally bought the Apple IIe version, which was a horrible port - it forced you to change disks over and over when you were first loading it and I eventually gave up on it.  I finally got the PC version a few years later (when I got a PC :) ) and really enjoyed it.  I also got a copy for my Amiga and I've often thought that if I were ever to replay it, it would probably be that one because from what I've seen so far it looks like that version may be even better than the PC (although now I see there's also a FRUA mod that perhaps I should do instead).

TotSF: My 2nd favorite.  I liked this version of the engine the best of all of them.  The gameplay was great.  I enjoyed the more non-linear approach and exploring, thought the outdoor system was fantastic, liked all the little extra things about weather and movement and whatnot, etc.  Also, I though the area designs were particularly well done, very believable and immersive.  There's the thing about the ship battle that was really cool.  Etc.  I thought entirely resolving then totally changing the plot towards the end was a little weird, but it didn't detract from my enjoyment of the game.

GttSF: Same basic reasons as TotSF.  TotSF reminds me of an improved version of this one.

DKoK: The DL series was great and I thought this was the best of them.  It had great gameplay and a really good story.  As I've mentioned in my earlier posts, I found the DL character choices to be the most fun.

CoK: This felt very fresh and inspired, but seemed a little less complete at times than the later games (less stuff changed at the end of the game, fewer optional areas, etc.).

DQoK: This was a good one, but I didn't like some of the engine changes (in FRUA's case, it is ok because those are a small price to play for the the ability to play/design custom modules and there are some work-around's).  I've always found  Taladas very interesting, enjoyed the Time of the Dragon boxed set and associated modules.  That said, I think I would have probably set the story in Ansalon to have it tie in more closely with the previous 2 games.  The gameplay was great.  I still don't quite know how to feel about that gnome cutscene near the end ... :)  As far as the engine changes, I had to wonder, after 2 previous games and the many associated hours of play in those games, why suddenly remove my custom icons and change the interface around on the last game of the trilogy?  I was particularly irritated by the loss of my custom icons and it took me quite a while to stop using the "move" command and to use the "1/7" keypad instead of the arrows.  I can't remember for sure, but I think this was one of the first to have the "load" command, which was a good interface change.

PoD: Very epic, had most of my chars up to 40th level.  The FR series was the only set of games I've ever played with such a long lifespan on my characters, both in terms of the the 4 games and in terms of real years (did the first 2 in the 90's and the rest years later).  I thought the game itself was very well done and liked that it had such a huge amount of content.  That last battle was insanely difficult and I had to try it over and over and over before I finally won, but it was one of those things you remember so it was ok in the end.  I didn't like in the plot that everything that had happened basically reversed itself at the end with almost no one remembering, but the game overall was fantastic.  I still felt like PoR somehow had a better feel to it overall, though, so was the best of the 4.

CotAB: I enjoyed this, but for some reason it felt to me like the story somehow didn't fit into the engine quite as well as PoR.  I didn't care much for the outdoor system in that one, felt like a regression from PoR.  I was much happier when I got to the PoD/DL outdoor system and even happier with the GttSF/TotSF outdoor system.

SotSB: This one was a bit too linear for my tastes, but I enjoyed it quite a bit anyway as it was the first one I'd played in many years and I've enjoyed every game in the series, just some more than others.  I thought it was an interesting story with some very interesting areas.  The mapping was painful since the areas went on and on and got a little tedious because it tended to be some kind of repeating pattern system or something.  For such a long game, I did not like the complete lack of an outdoor system, as it made it feel more enclosed and linear.

Heirs: I found it to be enjoyable but I read many posts here and have to agree that it was the weakest of the series.  That said, I personally didn't think it was terrible or anything; I still enjoyed it.  While I actually liked the lack of a clear path through the main plot (which helped make it non-linear and encourage exploring), I never found a plot link between the main plot and the very last dungeon; I had to resort to cheating by looking at the design.  It seems that last dungeon suddenly appears towards the end of the game, but I couldn't find it because I had already explored there so had no reason to check it again and found nothing in NPC conversations etc. to lead me back there to recheck that particular spot.  I was also disappointed that it started at high level given that it was intended as a new, default adventure so that didn't make much sense to me.  I think the same plot would have worked fine at low levels.  I was going to take the opportunity of a single game (no series) to play some non-humans and thus avoid the level limits, but I had to abandon that idea when I found it started at high level.

I played the games in the order: FR, then DL, then FRS, then Heirs.  That order may have somewhat influenced my opinions here.  For example, I had some trouble in PoR originally (getting used to the game), so my characters weren't as interesting as those I designed later.  I may have had more fun with PoD if my characters had been less plain (3 fighters, 2 clerics, and a MU).  By the end of PoD, they had already been losing XP to the level 40 max for quite a while.

Sorry for the long post.  I have been so into these games for so many years that I enjoy the opportunity to share some of my experiences.

Offline PetrusOctavianus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 391
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #54 on: October 08, 2015, 10:31:13 AM »
Good post! And I agree the order you play the games may influence your opinions.

I disagree with your assessment of the Savage Frontier overland maps, though. It's very good looking, but in Gateway there's absolutely nothing to discover by exploring, and each part of the overland map only has one or two possible types of random encounters. One on map you'll encounter two Ankhegs every sixth step or so, for example.
Treasures is somewhat better in that regard, and IMO overall a much better game than Gateway, which I consider the weakest of all the fantasy Gold Box games, mainy due to very poor encounter design.
This thread is rather old, so I'm probably repeating myself now.

Offline Vix

  • Mmmm ... Spider Slushies!
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #55 on: October 08, 2015, 01:00:02 PM »
You'll find this forum to be a friendly place, ag87.

I've seen threads necro'd a year or more after the last post, so don't worry about it. We find new voices in the community to be a great thing and encourage you to participate, even if it is in response to old threads or closed polls. :D

Offline ag87

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #56 on: October 08, 2015, 02:48:38 PM »
You'll find this forum to be a friendly place, ag87.

Yes, very much, thanks.  I just want to be polite as possible by doing things properly.

I've seen threads necro'd a year or more after the last post, so don't worry about it. We find new voices in the community to be a great thing and encourage you to participate, even if it is in response to old threads or closed polls. :D

Cool, thanks

Offline ag87

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: POLL: Favorite Gold-Box Game?
« Reply #57 on: October 08, 2015, 03:58:34 PM »
Good post! And I agree the order you play the games may influence your opinions.

Thanks

I disagree with your assessment of the Savage Frontier overland maps, though. It's very good looking, but in Gateway there's absolutely nothing to discover by exploring, and each part of the overland map only has one or two possible types of random encounters. One on map you'll encounter two Ankhegs every sixth step or so, for example.
Treasures is somewhat better in that regard, and IMO overall a much better game than Gateway, which I consider the weakest of all the fantasy Gold Box games, mainy due to very poor encounter design.
This thread is rather old, so I'm probably repeating myself now.

Thanks for your reply.  I totally understand what you are saying.

In particularly, I agree that that the random encounters outside got really tiring and some of them were extremely redundant (I explored the map looking for anything I'd missed, except the moors to the south; there were just too many encounters there, 1 every step!).  In fact, after the final battle and related sequence when it drops you off outside afterwards, for me there was immediately a mundane random encounter with ogres :)  That was before I could even do a final save!  I thought that was a bit anti-climactic.

Also, even in TotSF, there weren't nearly enough extra things to find (I think just the tower and the 3 dwarf puzzle dungeons).  I explored most of the overland and was a little disappointed that they hadn't added a few more hidden things here and there.

But in my opinion, I felt like the disadvantages were outweighed by the advantages:

- The very open and non-linear feel to it, I guess because how large it was and how it could theoretically be even larger if the designers had wanted (although I do recall DQoK also flipped between maps at the N/S border, which I really liked).  As a huge fan of the early Ultima games, I have always liked the large overhead maps and many areas to explore.

- I liked the various details that were included with it: the weather system (not just the text, but also visible snow on the ground), the ability to use boats on the rivers (not necessary but still fun), terrain/weather considerations in battle, etc.  Also, the really well done design of the maps probably helped a lot as well.  Somehow I just found the overall feel to be the best.

I thought there was actually another weakness, though: While the direction thing was useful in remembering which direction I was currently heading (if I got up for a while and came back), overall I found it awkward and pointless for an overhead system.  I understand why it is there for the "area" view (and assume that's probably why it was included), but there was no real reason to include that for the outdoor view.

I agree the system had some flaws, but I think it was evolving in the right direction and would have liked to see where they would have gone with it had there been a third game in that series.  Or it'd be great to see what a FRUA design could do with it (don't know if anyone has hacked it in or anything).

Personally, I liked GttSF a lot (3rd favorite), but agree TotSF was definitely an improvement.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2015, 04:41:36 PM by ag87 »