Golden Deer Pub Community Forums

I agree with Maxine on EOIII. The classes of EOIII are a tad pretentious and a bit much. Considering EO's somewhat intentionally dated design choices, I like... boring, simple classes, with a few interesting ones mixed in to remind you of their creativity. The classes of EOIII largely reminded me of some illustrious new age manga or something. In this game, odd classes are the majority, and simple ones the minority. Having very interesting classes are fine, but the spice should serve to flavour the dish rather than vice versa.

Back with the first EO, the Dark Hunter and to some extent Hexer were like "WHOA!" because they were kind of funky in the midst of RPG archetypes (which fit the 80s CRPGesque gameplay). It was just enough to remind you it was a modern game with a creative team behind it, and you could talk about the Dark Hunter when you wanted to mention something interesting about the game, but it was special because it was obscure.

On the topic of world, while they later did a better job of out-of-labyrinth exploration in EOIV, I was not a fan of sailing at all. I get that it was like a limited movement puzzle, but it lost its novelty fast, for me. Fourth labyrinth was amazing, though, and one of my series favourites.

If EOIII did one thing right, it had probably the best battle music and I think the class passive skills set the precedent for how they would add flavour to the core functionality of characters, in addition to giving us more party variety via added skills. Both class proficiency and to a greater degree subclassing I felt had a lot of room for improvement (which they did in EOIV), but they had to start somewhere.


Series for me is like:
EOIV
EOU2
EOU
EOI
EOII
EOIII
EMD

Which reminds me, I need to get back to EO4. I barely ever got through the first dungeon.

... I both love and hate these games. Love because it's just some semi-challenging romp through an rpg where you need to know what you're doing and be prepared. Hate because I fret over party make-up way too much and stop playing because I think my party sucks, even if I look for advice or are doing fine. Also applies to any rpg with a party making system (Baldur's Gate/ Icewind Dale).

Once you reach the 2nd land, you can change around your party as many times as you like. Its pretty much got the best source of EXP in the game. Heck, after you unlock Arcanist there's an NPC can level you right up to 25 for a limited number of times if you're not happy with your current setup or want to try an Arcanist out. This also happens when you unlock Bushi and Imperials as well.

As for my EO series pref, I'd probably go along the lines of:
EO4 > EO3 > EO2 > EOU1 > EO1 > EMD

So far, I kinda want to put EOU2 above EO3, but I think I should finish the game first before laying my judgment on it. EO4 and 3 are my favorite games in the series, mainly due to the variety of ways you can customize your characters.

I'm not a huge fan of EOU1, but then again I played Story first, and that probably jaded my opinions on the game as a whole.

This is all just my opinion, feel free to disagree. What would make EOIII better for me may not be what would for you.

I think most of EOIII's classes are simple while fitting the island theme, with the exception of Yggdroids, Arbalists, Zodiacs, and maybe even Shoguns. I would have preferred a more "basic" magic user, maybe a shaman-like type in some islandy robes over the robot-like Zodiacs. Yggdroids are just entirely too out there for me, but I like some of the skillset in theory. The Arbalist class would seem a little less silly if it had smaller crossbows and maybe was combined with the Farmer, which I feel is a neat enough class that didn't end up being useful for the main party. With shogun I feel like the general look of an island knight was covered by the Hoplite, even if they drew from different cultures (Spain and Japan). Some of their skills could have been given to the Ninjas if you wanted to get rid of them,(which is basically the Nightseeker from EOIV). But, they work well enough as an outside addition from a different area for later in the game, so I'm OK with them.

This being said, I love the Wildling class and would love to see it brought back again. Very innovative and fits the island vibe excellently. So much better than the beast class in EOII. Enough good things cannot be said about the Princess class, and they brought the concept back in EOIV as a result. Buccaneer was like a more versatile Dark Hunter class, good for either row to fill out a party, so that's a good step. Gladiators are simple warriors with a look that really fits the setting. Monks are... Passable.

Even if I don't love the concept of all of the new classes, it's the first entry in the series where any party setup is actually viable, which is something. Come to think of it, EOIV did an excellent job of taking the good concepts from EOIII, leaving the bad, and bringing them into the "regular" EO setting.

My ranking for the games is:

EOII
EOIV
EOIII

But I haven't played them all yet. EOIV is the best-made one I've tried, but EOII is my favorite to play for the general atmosphere and now nostalgic reasons.

hmm... rankings an opinions, hm.?

i'd probably go with
EOIII
EOU2/2
EMD
EO4
EOU/1

i guess its not fair to count "classic modes"in the untolds as the old versions in all their nostalgic/ un-refined glory. (dont kill me, i mean the fact they arent the more the refined untold versions). but at the same time, which all the extra polish untold gives classic mode, i want to think of them as "definitive" versions... or at least "ports"

EO4 was my first in the series and i honestly cant say enough good for it. it's the game i hope to sit down and revisit. its a game i played through and enjoyed, and the game that led me here. but, like untold, its a game i'd picked up to start anew.... and put down 5 minutes later.
with Untold, i'm sure it was playing story mode that really jaded me... i spend more time "simulating" EO games than i do playing them. im the planner. a theorycrafter... maybe note code-cracking and min-maxing.. but playing with how classes/skills/mechanics play together. (seriously guys, as im typing this, im playing around with a survivalist setup i thought of in eou2. if it works, youll hear about it in the rantage thread later!)

EO3 was a dream come true for that with its near unrestricted class combinations. EOU2s grimoire system offers all that and more. if it werent for the fact im not done, i would maybe say it IS my favorite over eo3 in that regard.

and then theres 4. i really do want to give it the second chance it deserves... though i think its the general lack of CLASS synergies available and how subclassing as a whole is handled. replaying it after Untold was a bit off-putting... i think it really puts into perspective how much EO4's Skill system was in a bit of a "transitioning" period.

Untold, on the other hand... for as much as i love what they started with the Skill system... Alter Class didnt cut it for me. Grimoires were a joke. you couldnt really freely "play" with the classes. Story mode in terms of the game itself wasnt what i love from EO... though as someone who never played the original EO1, the story didnt rub me the wrong way like it seemed to do for the majority of you guys. and as unfair as it is, its the game i never feel the urge to revisit because of it... even when rationally, classic mode would somewhat alleviate that aspect...

And EMDs there for the pure virtue that whenever i get the urge to play it, i just get lost in it. i guess we could chalk that up to the fact thats how mystery dungeon is, and has no bearing on it's etrian-ness, but hey. maybe not a mainstay, but its sure a fun little romp. i guess you can call it my potato chips of the EO series. EO-lite. i dunno. i think im getting weird now

No, I really liked hearing your opinions on this. All the games are well done, so there are plenty of reasons for each to be someone's favorites.

Pretty interesting the opinions people have on sub-classes and Grimoires.

I detest the sub-class system in EOIII because... for many characters, they will be built to focus on skills from another class. It often serves to devalue choices. This doesn't help that the choices in EOIII felt less meaningful overall. This leads me to lose interest with the game because I become less and less engaged, and I always drop out shortly before the end. It helps to make any party viable, but when they lose a lot of their identity I can't say I feel particularly enthused about it.

I feel EOIV did sub-classing perfectly, with its halved max skill levels and dual wielding. It softened the weaknesses and shortcomings of certain classes just enough to allow more variety. For instance, giving direct heals from the Medic to the Arcanist; you can go a whole boss fight not using them, but if you get unlucky or just need a little comfort, they're there. Class balance aside (IE Medics sucking overall), it doesn't feel like functionally the Arcanist replaces the Medic, in this instance. Some classes like the Runemaster had less exciting options for sub-classing, though there are still fun options for any class for those that want them. The fact there are lots of skills that are strong with only a few points in them helps to be able to find something of value.

I loathe the Grimoire system. I prefer the system used in EO2U over sub-classing in EOIII, for what it's worth. On one hand, being able to cherrypick from classes ends up with some situations you can give a Hexer an elemental shield, Link Order, and War Heal and you literally take away all the flaws of a class and invalidate the need for others. On the other hand, I think being able to empower skills past their limit is really cool. In any event, it's way too volatile; on earlier files, the game threw WAY too many Grimoires at me and sorting through them is tedious, while on later files I can go two stratums without getting even 1 level of what I want, let alone a level of the skill that is good.

I don't know why subclassing or grimoires have to exist. I loved EO1 and 2's formula. Yes certain parties were better than others and there was "cookie cutter" teams and then there were teams that you might have had a more difficult time with. In post game it was figuring out that winning combination - it just totally turned the system on its head. Still, I was happy with working each of the characters up to that "one special" skill that would ace the hell out of things.

Somehow subclassing is just "if I wanted a X's skills, I would have chosen X and put him in my party". Everyone says "oh, you don't have to worry about it" but you do. IF you don't bother with subclassing then in the end it will come back to haunt you. In my first playthrough I did subclassing horribly and I was unable to continue through with postgame because of it.

With grimoires at least the system is a little more fair in that I could say "fuck it" and not worry about it. EOU2 at least it feels like it enhances in all the right ways to where it's the best mechanic. I don't feel pressured into bothering with X's skills to improve the class that I have. So far with the game I'm enjoying what I get and using it to beef up my party in all the right ways for a boss and then I can switch my formulas around and just forget it if I don't want it.

There's always a best skill. Subclassing means that anybody can bring the best skill.

Fable II. completed the main story, now doing the See the future and Knothole island content. I love this game so much. the characters feel so well done (in my opinion) and even though i do not approve of what they did to the final conflict (those who played will understand) it was still really well done in it's own right. Overall, i'd give this game a 93/100.

Welp, seince now on fable 2 it's just waiting for money to roll in, i've been playing the EOUII demo, along with EOU. now i really want EOUII. blegh.

I beat the last of the Muramasa Rebirth - Genroku Legends stories yesterday. They're really interesting additions to the main game. Quite short (only 2½ boss battles each), but with good stories, and refreshingly different weaponry (main characters are a nekomata, farmer, ninja, and oni respectively). They're only very loosely connected to the main storylines and eachother, so you can play them in any order. Recommended to Muramasa (Rebirth) fans

I want that game so bad, but I can't justify buying a vita just for one or two games.

^ Vita makes a bunch of Playstation- and PS2-games portable. And plays PSP-things.

The Vita has a decent selection of games nowadays, but yah, the price is still quite high (and doesn't include a memory card).