![ultimaU2%20-%20dos%20-%2049[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/KkB2O9Q.png "ultimaU2%20-%20dos%20-%2049[1].png")
What are some good first-person dungeon crawlers that aren't too reliant on a mouse (I'm on a trackpad) on DOS?
>>2821975
I'm currently playing daggerfall on a trackpad. It's not too bad once you get used to it. Put it to mouse controls for viewing.
>>2821986
I would play Daggerfall but I'm in a dungeon crawling mood, andI can never seem to find any dungeons besides crypts with two rooms.
>>2821991
i'd give it another shot if you can. when you do manage to find a proper dungeon, it takes a few hours to explore. it's a really fantastic dungeon crawler.
anyway, played the might and magic series? if you don't want something mouse heavy you might want to stick to turn-based stuff anyway. play world of xeen if you haven't already.
>>2821975
underworld works great with mostly keyboard controls only use the touchpad for items and menus and shit. Otherwise most functions have shortcuts
Does it have to be IBM/DOS?
Wizardry 6 in any case
I'm not OP, but I'd like to add a second requirement: I'm looking for old first person dungeon crawlers, where the viewport is as big as possible. OPs pic is nice already, but even bigger would be even nicer
>>2822087
Wizardry 1-5 have the whole screen as the viewing field with optional overview over your party.
They're not natively on DOS though.
>>2821975
Elder Scrolls: The Arena is another great dungeon
crawler because of the unique designs of each dungeon
>>2822129
That pic really makes me look forward to TES6, if only to satisfy my morbid curiousity on how they're gone devolve the dungeons next
>>2822120
That's not exactly the pinnacle of visual complexity. I was thinking about something closer to this
>>2822023
>anyway, played the might and magic series?
That's what I'm playing right now, but no auto-map is killing me.
>>2822210
pen and paper, draw your own map
>>2822218
Can't do that on the go, and that doesn't suit short play intervals.
>>2822150
You said old, not flashy.
>>2822223
I don't think short play intervals were a requirement for that series. On the go you can use your dungeon drawing app, or a small notepad.
Drawing manual maps slows the pace of a game, and makes you think more about your environment.
>>2822224
Old in the sense of /vr/, fuckface.
Stonekeep's not flashy either, but what do you know?
>>2822210
Are you playing MM3 to 5, those have auto-mapping if one of your party member is a cartographer.
I managed to finish 3 back when I didn't have a mouse.
>>2822225
>I don't think short play intervals were a requirement for that series.
I didn't say otherwise, in fact I said that games without auto-mapping actually work against short play intervals.
>>2822229
I'm playing 1, and I don't want to skip to 3 since 1 and 2 are part of the trilogy.
>>2822230
And I said that's likely by design. So complaining about that seems kind of silly.
>>2821991
>I can never seem to find any dungeons besides crypts with two rooms.
join a guild. 90% of guild quests are basically "crawl this dungeon, find it's [quest_goal] and [verb] the [thing_you_find_there] and return to us". Unlike morrowind and oblivion, there are infinite guild quests for you to grind the shit out of, so have at it.
Temple guilds are good for this, as they're all basically the same guild with one or two differences.
>>2822232
You can safely skip 1-2. M&M games are really light on the story, it's mostly about exploring stuff and getting 1000000 gold in treasure hoards then spending it to get level 110 and Lloyd Beaconing to wells and statues to one-shot everything. M&M3 alone barely has a plot, it's just a bunch of towns with their problems and the actual storyline can be picked up on by only watching the intro and the final cutscene. M&M3 lacks a "real" conclusion until M&M7, in fact.
You could just go with World of Xeen if you were short on time.
>>2822802
On that note, u keep on getting errors when I try to install m&m3 on win98se. Is anyone experienced with this?
>>2822810
why don't you just install it on DOSBox? 98SE is not exactly a native environment for it
>>2822817
I'm using actual hardware if that changes anything
I can read the files off of the disks but it stops during installation with an error code. Sorry I can't tell you right now, I'm not at the machine atm.
>>2822918
>I'm using actual hardware if that changes anything
Yeah, I figured that much (makes no sense to install a DOS game in a 98SE VM), and it makes things harder. In Win98SE you can still drop to some DOS equivalent (during boot), so you might have a chance, but I'd not bet on this game installing or running well in this environment, or that you have DOS drivers for your audio and video hardware. That machine is likely pretty damn perfect for Win9x gaming, but unless you dual boot to DOS I can't imagine DOS games to be a pleasant experience on it. Nothing against authentic hardware/experience and all that, but for the vast majority of DOS software DOSBox is currently the most hassle-free environment
>>2822316
Thanks
>>2822940
I see. Well I've got two drives, which should be mountable in DOS. I guess I just go make a boot disk and get to town?
Dark Heart of Uukrul.
Entire game is keyboard run
>>2822139
>dungeons
The "game" will literally just be 8 hours of cutscenes.
>>2823684
If you want to boot to DOS on a 98 installation all you need to do is hold down the CTRL key while booting. You should get a list of boot options, one of which is 'Command prompt only'. However, unless your config.sys and autoexec.bat have certain drives set up you may not be able to access your CD drive.
If that doesn't work just install it on Dosbox and then copy the game files to your real Dos machine somehow. That should work.
>>2821975
what game is this?
>>2822940
>Nothing against authentic hardware/experience and all that, but for the vast majority of DOS software DOSBox is currently the most hassle-free environment
Are there any cases where this isn't true, other than, say, Open XCom? Can Dosbox be configured to use a PC speaker?
>>2825941
OpenXCom is not a DOS game, so that's a bit of an odd statement. DOSBox of course is made for DOS games and programs (Windows 3.x is a DOS program).
DOSBox includes PC speaker emulation. I expect it can not use a real bleeper as much as it can't drive a real CGA screen. All its hardware is emulated.
>>2825941
>Can Dosbox be configured to use a PC speaker?
No, I do not believe so. It will emulate the PC speaker and send the bleeps and bloops to your sound card for output.
>>2825931
Ultima Underworld.
Anvil of Dawn (also a criminally underrated game at that)
You obviously still have to use your mouse to pick up items and sort your inventory and shit, but the entire game itself isn't really heavily reliant on it. The most dire situation you will find yourself in is having to move the cursor to click spells and click your weapon to attack.
>>2822139
>TES6
>dungeons
I would recommend
curse of azure bonds
buck rogers countdown to doomsday
buck rogers time cubed
The Lands Of Lore series is good. The last one seems a bit rushed but its fun to play if you just like going around killing stuff and exploring. There's puzzles in all of them. Best thing is it's easily played without a mouse. I play these on a laptop.
Is there anyway to make Ultima Underworld play better? I really love the setting/lore but the mouse controls grate on me. I'm not even looking for mouselook, if I can set movement/looking to keyboard I'd be fine with that.
>>2828159
You can move with the keyboard.
A to turn left
D to turn right
W to run forward
X to walk backward
J to jump
Q to fly up
E to fly down
Z to shift left
C to shift right
1 to look up
3 to look down
2 to center the view
Hold shift to move faster and make or to standing long jump.
I've always wanted to ask: should i play Wizardry?
I've played modern DC like Etrian Odyssey and the oldest i've played is Ultima Underworld and SMT II (and i found hard playing Ultima since i didn't grow up playing computer games)
They're worth it or i'm not missing much?
>>2829245
If you are a fan of EO then you probably owe it to yourself to at least check out an entry in the Wizardry series.
>>2829307
Which should i play? I've heard 2 is so hard it was impossible
>>2825852
I was referring to floppies actually, I have a CD as well as 3 and 5 inch fdds and the game is on 5" disks. I still need to see if my mobo has a bios that can support 2 floppies at once.
I booted into DOS-98 but the installation had the same problem as it did running inside 98. I considered making a DOS boot disk and running off of that, maybe installing DOS onto a second hard disk, but I dunno. So far I'm having problems even making a floppy, I keep trying to run a program to make a DOS disk but it keeps failing immediately, what's more is I can't even read the floppies anymore where before they were working. Also the CD drive isn't being detected anymore, despite being plugged in.
Guess you could say I got issues on my win98 machine.
>>2825852
I'll try the dosbox method if I decide that I'm tired of hardware shenanigans. I will say though that the dancing man they put in that game's installer is quite entertaining.
>>2829317
Think 4 is the one with the reputation for being bullshit
>>2829317
Wizardry 2 is a addon to 1. You're supposed to import a party that beat Werdna. It didn't even originally offer an option to create new characters.
It's impossible to advance past the first floor without a character that can cast the teleport spell.
Personally I feel like Wizardry 5 is a good starting point. The beginning is easier and there are less encounters that completely fuck you over before you can act. It's also possible to export characters to Wizardry 1-3.
The FM Towns port is particularly nice but PS1 should also work.
Dungeon Hack is pretty fun.
>>2822150
maybe one of the console remakes
>>2829770
Okay, thanks
>>2822316
Dungeon crawlies always have the best fetch quests. You actually have to look explore to find the shit you're looking for.
>>2831572
It's the result of how saves were handled in Wizardry 1.
Wizardry 3 and 5 have limitations on character imports.
>>2826182
>The most dire situation you will find yourself in is having to move the cursor to click spells and click your weapon to attack.
Still too mouse oriented for me, I'm looking for something where I'll only use it to sort out m inventory at a frozen inventory screen at most.
>>2822228
are you implying wizardry doesn't belong in /vr/ you fucking retard?
>>2835589
No, he's just an oddball that thinks he has to specify he wants retro games when asking for games here.
Wizardry is old in comparison to most other retro games.
>>2835640
>that thinks he has to specify he wants retro games
Or maybe someone that just used "old" to refer to old games, instead of ancient ones. I'm not here 24/7
>>2835640
>>2836365
yeah but thats the whole point of /vr/, to discuss old games. there is only a cap for how new a game can be, not how old. when you come here looking for a game you shouldn't be surprised to have a game a little bit older than super mario bros
>i want old, not old
>ancient
what the fuck
>>2836610
ok, maybe read up on the actual exchange. Look at the games already suggested in the thread, then my comment. Surely my comment was aimed at bigger visuals, where the artwork shines, because dungeon crawlers in the mid 80s and early 90s had the unfortunate tendency to give you a stamp-sized viewport on a crowded interface. Wizardry has no visuals. What's the use of that viewport? Certainly not to emphasize the visuals. I politely clarified my position, and anon went all rude fuckface on me, calling a game like Stonekeep flashy. I already explained in another post that my usage of "old" was not exactly ideal, and yet here you go as well, harping on that, fuckface. If you want to be a technically correct smartass, be my guest. Just don't expect any friendliness for being one of the many shitheads that makes this otherwise pleasant board a cesspit
>>2837014
>What's the use of that viewport?
So you get a nice clear view of the dungeon. Look at the original Apple II HUD for Wiz 1 and 2 where it's tiny and you easily overlook or misjudge things.
>>2837046
The visual complexity of that viewport is minimal, and so is the feedback given to the player. The viewport shown in your screen is much more useful for this game, as it's basically just a shorthand to describe character movement and environment, just like the various symbols on a rouge top-down map. The game itself is strongly text driven. What is useless in your screenshot is the constant reminder of the controls. Handy for a beginner, space waster for anybody playing a slight bit longer.
>>2837059
>The viewport shown in your screen is much more useful for this game,
But the reworked interface allowed to to turn party display on and off. You got the same information but reduced the errors for mapping when it mattered.
Remember that people played this on small, fuzzy CRTs and Wizardry is a game where one wrong step can spell your doom.
>>2837079
I can accept that. Frankly, the ability to turn off parts of the interface, to focus on others, is pretty important. It's a shame many later games didn't get the memo
>>2821975
Hexen
>Inventory
>Classes
>First person
>Full of dungeons
>Endless monster grinding
>Hard as fuck puzzles.
>Literally not going to succeed without the walk through
>Dont feel bad if you have to refer to the walkthrough every time you get stuck
>Great game
>Fun to design maps for
>Can be played with keyboard no problem
