Posted by ArbitraryWater (11462 posts) -

Yep. Since none of you seem to have any appreciation for fighting games or Street Fighter Alpha, you can forget any more of those blogs. That's what I get for putting part 1 in the title I guess. I still intend to tackle story and choice for bad RPGs one of these days, even if it means making it more of a discussion topic or... I dunno. Asking Ahoodedfigure. He seems like the type to write a long, thoughtful blog on the subject. Me? I spend my time scouring shady abandonware sites and "Whatever was on sale this week on GOG" in order to record videos of them and make surface judgements that may or may not be indicative of final product. Of course, of the games I've bothered to mess with, only Betrayal at Krondor, Dark Sun and Wizardry VII have made lasting *positive* impressions. 
 
This week, you may be surprised to find out that I've actually found earlier, crappier versions of games you know and love, in order to savage them before the internet. Or not. It's all cool as far as I'm concerned.

Warcraft 1. (yes, the first Warcraft game.)

 
Ah Warcraft. Before you were THE MMO that mattered in the world, you were a trio of very good RTS games. While some aren't the biggest fans of Warcraft III, I am not one of them. I'll take more small scale micro with RPG elements over zerg rush macro most days of the week. Oh, and Warcraft II was pretty great as well. But alas, we're talking about Warcraft. Which one? Warcraft: Orcs and Humans. Notice the lack of number. This game came out in 1994. That's 2 years after Dune II and 1 year before Command and Conquer. Thus, one could justifiably call the RTS genre "Fledgling" at this point in time. Which totally explains the nonstandard mechanics. Like how you have to manually order your units to move and harvest. The page on this site says otherwise, but I'm pretty sure I was pressing the right mouse button. That right there damns Warcraft far more than it probably deserves. Like Warcraft II, there aren't a ton of differences between the factions, but hey, I'll take what I can get. This game still has a lot of that Warcraft charm for being so early, but if this video isn't proof enough, I think you're good if you just play Warcraft II. Gotta love that intro narration though.   
  Will probably play like... one skirmish map and then never play again. Ehhh. If only I could get C&C to work. Then we'd be in business.

Sid Meier's Civilization: No Roman Numeral

 
While the original non-remake version of Sid Meier's Colonization found its way into my hands and this blog series relatively early in its run when I randomly found it at a thrift store, I hadn't messed with actual serious Civ 1 until I found it. On the internet. And yo, is it Civilization. Albeit, a somewhat more primitive civ, but you can already see a lot of the ideas that make the latter games in the series so great here. It's obviously not great about conveying information (then again, buildings kind of do what you expect them to do. Build a granary first.), but then again these games didn't really get good at that until Civ IV, and at that point the sheer volume of the ancillary mechanics were probably enough to scare off some. There's not really a ton to say, so would you kindly watch this embedded video?   
  Will maybe play again for a hypothetical Civilization themed blog. Of course, the thing is I could probably play Civ II or IV (not III) and have a better experience. Speaking of Civ II, bonus points if you could recognize the sound blaster version of this tune in the above video.   
  Yeah, Civ II does have the best soundtrack, doesn't it? Also, there's apparently a PS1 version of it. Baba Yetu can go die in a corner.  Ahem, anyways, where were we?
 

Robinson's Requiem

 
What, you honestly expected me to go without a single shitty obscure title that I found during a GOG sale? In this case, I present to you from the developers of Ishar (AKA: That game that I literally posted the words "What the Fuck is this Shit?" and then a video) a game that seems like everything that is bad about old games. Robinson's Requiem is a survival adventure game, whatever the hell that means. Actually, what the hell it does mean is that you can die of just about anything and not having the right cure on hand at all times will lead to your death. At least, that's what I can figure out from the internet. I couldn't even get that far.   
  
  Amazing acting right there. You know, I'm being really mean to this game, as that video is clearly not indicative of gameplay. But, like Ishar it throws you to the wolves (pun intended) without a hope, a prayer, or any sort of information whatsoever. That's bad. Then again, maybe I'm not understanding the hidden quality bro. I mean, what if Hardcore mode from Fallout: New Vegas was actually anything resembling hardcore? Oh wait. Then it'd actually suck, as opposed to Hardcore mode only being hardcore if you're a pussy who's incapable of just carrying a bunch of water. Will something something again.  But hey, it was $3. No harm done, right? Oh wait. Now it's going to be on my GOG shelf forever and ever. Crap. Better put it next to Master of Orion 3.
 
And with that, I should probably go to bed. I seem to post these really late, don't I?
#1 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11462 posts) -

Yep. Since none of you seem to have any appreciation for fighting games or Street Fighter Alpha, you can forget any more of those blogs. That's what I get for putting part 1 in the title I guess. I still intend to tackle story and choice for bad RPGs one of these days, even if it means making it more of a discussion topic or... I dunno. Asking Ahoodedfigure. He seems like the type to write a long, thoughtful blog on the subject. Me? I spend my time scouring shady abandonware sites and "Whatever was on sale this week on GOG" in order to record videos of them and make surface judgements that may or may not be indicative of final product. Of course, of the games I've bothered to mess with, only Betrayal at Krondor, Dark Sun and Wizardry VII have made lasting *positive* impressions. 
 
This week, you may be surprised to find out that I've actually found earlier, crappier versions of games you know and love, in order to savage them before the internet. Or not. It's all cool as far as I'm concerned.

Warcraft 1. (yes, the first Warcraft game.)

 
Ah Warcraft. Before you were THE MMO that mattered in the world, you were a trio of very good RTS games. While some aren't the biggest fans of Warcraft III, I am not one of them. I'll take more small scale micro with RPG elements over zerg rush macro most days of the week. Oh, and Warcraft II was pretty great as well. But alas, we're talking about Warcraft. Which one? Warcraft: Orcs and Humans. Notice the lack of number. This game came out in 1994. That's 2 years after Dune II and 1 year before Command and Conquer. Thus, one could justifiably call the RTS genre "Fledgling" at this point in time. Which totally explains the nonstandard mechanics. Like how you have to manually order your units to move and harvest. The page on this site says otherwise, but I'm pretty sure I was pressing the right mouse button. That right there damns Warcraft far more than it probably deserves. Like Warcraft II, there aren't a ton of differences between the factions, but hey, I'll take what I can get. This game still has a lot of that Warcraft charm for being so early, but if this video isn't proof enough, I think you're good if you just play Warcraft II. Gotta love that intro narration though.   
  Will probably play like... one skirmish map and then never play again. Ehhh. If only I could get C&C to work. Then we'd be in business.

Sid Meier's Civilization: No Roman Numeral

 
While the original non-remake version of Sid Meier's Colonization found its way into my hands and this blog series relatively early in its run when I randomly found it at a thrift store, I hadn't messed with actual serious Civ 1 until I found it. On the internet. And yo, is it Civilization. Albeit, a somewhat more primitive civ, but you can already see a lot of the ideas that make the latter games in the series so great here. It's obviously not great about conveying information (then again, buildings kind of do what you expect them to do. Build a granary first.), but then again these games didn't really get good at that until Civ IV, and at that point the sheer volume of the ancillary mechanics were probably enough to scare off some. There's not really a ton to say, so would you kindly watch this embedded video?   
  Will maybe play again for a hypothetical Civilization themed blog. Of course, the thing is I could probably play Civ II or IV (not III) and have a better experience. Speaking of Civ II, bonus points if you could recognize the sound blaster version of this tune in the above video.   
  Yeah, Civ II does have the best soundtrack, doesn't it? Also, there's apparently a PS1 version of it. Baba Yetu can go die in a corner.  Ahem, anyways, where were we?
 

Robinson's Requiem

 
What, you honestly expected me to go without a single shitty obscure title that I found during a GOG sale? In this case, I present to you from the developers of Ishar (AKA: That game that I literally posted the words "What the Fuck is this Shit?" and then a video) a game that seems like everything that is bad about old games. Robinson's Requiem is a survival adventure game, whatever the hell that means. Actually, what the hell it does mean is that you can die of just about anything and not having the right cure on hand at all times will lead to your death. At least, that's what I can figure out from the internet. I couldn't even get that far.   
  
  Amazing acting right there. You know, I'm being really mean to this game, as that video is clearly not indicative of gameplay. But, like Ishar it throws you to the wolves (pun intended) without a hope, a prayer, or any sort of information whatsoever. That's bad. Then again, maybe I'm not understanding the hidden quality bro. I mean, what if Hardcore mode from Fallout: New Vegas was actually anything resembling hardcore? Oh wait. Then it'd actually suck, as opposed to Hardcore mode only being hardcore if you're a pussy who's incapable of just carrying a bunch of water. Will something something again.  But hey, it was $3. No harm done, right? Oh wait. Now it's going to be on my GOG shelf forever and ever. Crap. Better put it next to Master of Orion 3.
 
And with that, I should probably go to bed. I seem to post these really late, don't I?
#2 Posted by byrjun (154 posts) -

Curse me for lurking! I really really enjoyed your fighting game post, please do a part two! You rock, son! :)

#3 Posted by ahoodedfigure (4238 posts) -

Glad you added thoughtful, there :)
 
Robinson's Requiem is rather famous for being cruel and having an arcane control scheme, something that the Silmarils team, for all their adventurousness in design, seemed unable to move completely away from with a lot of their titles. I have that on my shelf but haven't even cracked it. In fact, I already have everything in that sale this weekend, I think it's not the first time they had it. I hope i paid about as much.
 
Warcraft...  I played it back when it was a demo, where they had unfair odds at the end of one of the stages to make you want to buy the full game. My feelings about Blizzard design have changed since that time, but it went from like, to dislike, to at least respect over the years. I never did finish Warcraft 2. The manual resource gathering is extra bad, but I hated having to think for my units too much. I guess I'd like more of a fog of war (what that term actually means) simulation about medieval-style battles, rather than a simulation of being a satellite with the delusion of omnipresence.

#4 Posted by Mento (2438 posts) -

Civ I's a classic. It got a lot of playtime until I discovered Master of Magic (which I'm always too keen to bring up, my bad.) If you do do a Civ blog, you might want to cover its various imitators and spinoffs instead of III or V. It's interesting what directions people thought of taking that empire-building template.
 
I did play through the first two Warcrafts with a friend of mine who had a permanent LAN at his home (he and his older brother had PCs.) I dunno if it was because he nearly always beat me in the competitive mode, ditto with Command & Conquer when he got that, but I've always preferred the single-player campaign in 4X games to multiplayer for their variation in goal targets and (mostly) allowing me to go at my own pace. I guess War Wind is the one I'm most familiar with, because that thing had four diverse campaigns and took forever to beat.

Moderator
#5 Posted by mosdl (3228 posts) -

Civ was the first PC game I ever played.  Blew my mind.  I really should play some more Civ 5...

#6 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2682 posts) -

Who didn't like Warcraft 3? What? 
 
 
And nice writeup.

#7 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11462 posts) -
@ahoodedfigure: I generally find it a pity that GOG never actually puts any of their "good" publishers up on sale all that often. Yeah, asking for an Interplay or Atari-Hasbro sale is like asking them to throw away money, as I'm sure that stuff sells just fine without the additional prodding that a sale brings. Nonetheless, I could use companies other than DotEmu, JoWood or Strategy First every other week, even if that seems like fallacy in and of itself. (Of course, saying that, I'm pretty sure I have a lot of the games I actually want and not just titles that I have purchased on impulse or for irony's sake). I'm bad at RTS games, but I've always been more of a single player or custom map guy myself. It's not something that especially bothers me at this point in time, although it has made Diablo my favorite Blizzard franchise.
 
@Mento: I have no qualms about your constant Master of Magic pimping. I dunno, maybe you could do an old vs new with Elemental War of Magic? Because that game apparently isn't horribly broken anymore. Actually, a Civ Spinoff blog would be interesting, but there are a lot of those games too. 
 
@Rolyatkcinmai: It's mostly the pro-Starcraft camp that is against Warcraft III. Of course, those people are also really good at Starcraft, so their opinons are skewed by that little factoid.
#8 Posted by mosdl (3228 posts) -
@ArbitraryWater: I always assumed that its the publisher who has to agree to sales and that it isn't up to GOG to set sale prices.
#9 Posted by Tordah (2471 posts) -

Warcraft 1 was pretty awesome at the time, even if the first C&C game utterly destroyed it a year later. I think the worst aspect of it is that it feels very restricted and kinda clunky. I'm of course talking about all the road building and only being able to select 4 units at a time. 
 
The only Civ game I've really given a shot is Civ IV, and even that was too complex for me. I played it for about 2 hours and had absolutely no idea what I was doing. I think I was winning but I'm not sure? I never finished that game so I'll never know. 
 
That Robinson's Requiem game was hilariously obscure and appropriate for this blog series. I salute you, good sir. Is that Dead Island with werewolves and laser blasters that I'm watching? Incredible.

#10 Posted by Claude (16254 posts) -

The first Civilization game I played was IV. It's funny watching that video and seeing the similarities of the one I played.  But damn, the first Civ seems quiet as hell. As if it was ancient, but only twenty years old.