GameBanshee Forums

I've been playing it in a leisurely fashion, since I've been very busy, but it really holds up well. Of course, it's not really an RPG. It's a hack n slash, a dungeon crawl. But it's colorful, well-designed, occasionally humorous, and very open in its sense of exploration. Well worth finding.

I liked that game a lot! Much better than M&M VI in my opinion.

Agreed. M&M VI had repetitive dungeons that were far, far too long for what they offered. The lack of a self-marking map was a drawback, considering how many sites were in the game. And the final section became nothing but

Spoiler

a matter of advancing a step, killing a dragon, healing, advancing another step, killing another dragon, healing, and doing that more than 20 times

.

I think they got the equation right with M&M VII. Though I also believe that, in their own way, M&M II, III, IV and V were all excellent titles. (VIII was fun, as well, as long as you didn't take a dragon into your party, and stuck with the same group you more or less started with.)

IX was a disaster, but then, it wasn't made by NWC.

fable wrote:I think they got the equation right with M&M VII. Though I also believe that, in their own way, M&M II, III, IV and V were all excellent titles. (VIII was fun, as well, as long as you didn't take a dragon into your party, and stuck with the same group you more or less started with.)

I agree entirely (except that I have not played MM II). The M&M serie is one of my favorite. The stories are not incredible, but the games are really fun. In fact I am one of the few who voted for M&M X in the poll where we were asked which game we would like to see.

IX was a disaster, but then, it wasn't made by NWC.

IX was nothing close to the others, but still, I have been able have fun with it... once patched of course!

I have to disagree about VII being much better than VI. Maybe it's because I played both as soon as they came out, but VI was a real ground breaker to me. I found the dungeons in VI well thought out personaly. It was definitely a 'bigger' game than VII in terms of playing time spent and area. Seven was a great game, and took the skill development to a higher level, but I enjoyed both of them fairly equally, VI has a slight edge with me though.

M&M VIII was a real disappointment, having bought III through VIII automatically based on the previous games (II was the first I played), after VIII I waited for players reaction before buying IX, and in fact never bought it. I did play it on a friends PC though, with patch, and it was a terrible let down. Still one of the best series ever despite that though.

What was it you found especially disappointing about VIII? I'm curious.

As for VI and VII, de gustibus. I tried playing VI again, recently, and didn't like at all what I consider its interminable dungeons throwing at you an endless supply of the same kind of attackers, over and over.

fable wrote:What was it you found especially disappointing about VIII? I'm curious.

The game was a lot smaller and too easy, I wasn't happy with the character development (too much undead involved for my tastes). It also had the 'problem' that the central storyline of the M&M series ended in VII, with the result that VIII lacked cohesion for me.

fable wrote:As for VI and VII, de gustibus. I tried playing VI again, recently, and didn't like at all what I consider its interminable dungeons throwing at you an endless supply of the same kind of attackers, over and over.

I think it's unfair to compare a game retroactively, IMO you should compare it to it's predecessors and contemporaries. In my recollection, M&M VI had more of a positive impact than VII did. Seven is excellent, but VI broke the ground, VII improved the character development, but I'd still recommend newbies to play VI, then play some other games, then play VII. Of course if they're into retro gaming, then go from II up (I never saw 1).

galraen wrote:The game was a lot smaller and too easy, I wasn't happy with the character development (too much undead involved for my tastes). It also had the 'problem' that the central storyline of the M&M series ended in VII, with the result that VIII lacked cohesion for me.

Speaking only for myself, I never went to M&M for the storyline, which I found cheesy from the start of the series. I played it as a series of fun, colorful quest encounters with lots of more-or-less randomized booty, in a very freely available environment. Which is pretty much as Van Caneghem envisioned it, if I recall correctly. He once laughed at the mention of the over-arching plot behind the series ("Plot? What plot?" he said), and told me they never wasted much time on it. (I was something of a semi-regular visitor to their offices before they joined Tripp's Evil Empire.) A bit showed up at the start, and they threw in bits now and again. But it was all about the fun of dungeon crawling.

Whether you look at simple dungeon crawling or beautifully crafted RPGs with plots and interactive environments, there are still very few being made these days that work well, IMO.

I think it's unfair to compare a game retroactively, IMO you should compare it to it's predecessors and contemporaries. In my recollection, M&M VI had more of a positive impact than VII did. Seven is excellent, but VI broke the ground, VII improved the character development, but I'd still recommend newbies to play VI, then play some other games, then play VII. Of course if they're into retro gaming, then go from II up (I never saw 1).

I'm not dissing VI in light of VII. In my initial review of VI, when it first came out, I found that it possessed very long dungeon crawls, with unimaginative design. I still found that to be the case, when I attempted to play it again, recently. Then I played M&M VII, and the team had rectified this by shortening dungeon lengths. It also tried to diversify the types of monsters you'd encounter.

Well I do like dungeon crawls.:laugh:

In fact just about all my top ten games of all time are of that ilk, in fact at least one (Dungeon Master), was nothing but a DC.