It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Demon Stone & Dragonshard. Opinions?(23 posts)(23 posts)
(23 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted December 15, 2013
Hey all,
Had gotten all the DnD games a while back & have played a little of them all, except Demon Stone and Dragonshard.
The two seem to be the ones... people dont like nor mention out of all those DnD games. Are they actually any good?. Opinions?.
Also, are there any other DnD games Hasbro has that aren't on GOG? (haven't really looked around).
Posted December 16, 2013
Couldn't stand Demon Stone; the OP in this thread pretty much summed up my own opinion. Never played Dragonshard; not really into RTS.
Posted December 16, 2013
avatar
BadDecissions: Couldn't stand Demon Stone; the OP in this thread pretty much summed up my own opinion. Never played Dragonshard; not really into RTS.
Yes, I can sign that one...
Please, do not waste your time with Demon Stone.

Dragonshard is not really good either, but I played it a long while ago and do not remember very much of it... which is a hint, is it not?
Posted December 16, 2013
avatar
BadDecissions: Couldn't stand Demon Stone; the OP in this thread pretty much summed up my own opinion. Never played Dragonshard; not really into RTS.
I also stand behind this thread regarding Demon Stone. It's really crappy.

As for Dragonshard, the little I played of it didn't impress me. Probably had to with the extreme inanity of the healers. They don't heal you automatically and their heal is extremely pathetic and costs a good amount of mana.
Posted December 16, 2013
Both these games are very....meh. Not horrible but not good.
Posted December 16, 2013
I've hidden both those titles from my shelf so I can pretend I don't have them.
Posted December 16, 2013
Dragonshard has some interesting ideas but there are some anachronisms within the game that ruins the experience and make the game just average. Can you imagine that in a game from 2005 melee units are practically useless? They die very fast, it's so much better to take ranged units only. Hello, Warcraft 2 already learnt from the mistakes of Warcraft 1 and pure archer army would get massacred fast.

The best idea in the game is that you have explore two different level over- and underworld. The former is the source of one resource (dragonshards) while the latter - of gold. The game mechanics differs between those worlds - overworld uses a typical RTS mechanics (the more power the better) while in the underworld you have to remember about traps, lock picking (you can find a lot of gold in locked chests), you can order your party to sleep to regain health and mana - something closer to a classical dungeon crawler.

EDIT: ah, one more thing! There are three different races in the game but there are campaigns for two of them only even though the third one is still present in the main story line. You can only play with the third race during skirmishes...
Post edited December 16, 2013 by Ghorpm
Posted December 16, 2013
avatar
Ghorpm: Dragonshard has some interesting ideas but there are some anachronisms within the game that ruins the experience and make the game just average. Can you imagine that in a game from 2005 melee units are practically useless? They die very fast, it's so much better to take ranged units only. Hello, Warcraft 2 already learnt from the mistakes of Warcraft 1 and pure archer army would get massacred fast.

The best idea in the game is that you have explore two different level over- and underworld. The former is the source of one resource (dragonshards) while the latter - of gold. The game mechanics differs between those worlds - overworld uses a typical RTS mechanics (the more power the better) while in the underworld you have to remember about traps, lock picking (you can find a lot of gold in locked chests), you can order your party to sleep to regain health and mana - something closer to a classical dungeon crawler.

EDIT: ah, one more thing! There are three different races in the game but there are campaigns for two of them only even though the third one is still present in the main story line. You can only play with the third race during skirmishes...
This sounded like a game called Armies of Exiogo?..cant remember the exact spelling but that had fighting in overworld and underworld at the same time as well (or at least as i remember...)
Posted December 16, 2013
avatar
Ghorpm: Dragonshard has some interesting ideas but there are some anachronisms within the game that ruins the experience and make the game just average. Can you imagine that in a game from 2005 melee units are practically useless? They die very fast, it's so much better to take ranged units only. Hello, Warcraft 2 already learnt from the mistakes of Warcraft 1 and pure archer army would get massacred fast.

The best idea in the game is that you have explore two different level over- and underworld. The former is the source of one resource (dragonshards) while the latter - of gold. The game mechanics differs between those worlds - overworld uses a typical RTS mechanics (the more power the better) while in the underworld you have to remember about traps, lock picking (you can find a lot of gold in locked chests), you can order your party to sleep to regain health and mana - something closer to a classical dungeon crawler.

EDIT: ah, one more thing! There are three different races in the game but there are campaigns for two of them only even though the third one is still present in the main story line. You can only play with the third race during skirmishes...
avatar
nijuu: This sounded like a game called Armies of Exiogo?..cant remember the exact spelling but that had fighting in overworld and underworld at the same time as well (or at least as i remember...)
No idea, I've never heard of it :)
Posted December 16, 2013
@Ghorpm Thanks for your toughts on Dragonshard. Still contemplating here.
Post edited December 16, 2013 by Crappynuker1
Posted December 16, 2013
I found Demon Stone fairly fun... on the PlayStation 2. A friend of mine has the PC version and the controls don't seem to have been adapted to mouse and keyboard very well.

I played a bit of Dragonshard at some point but didn't really get into it.
Posted December 16, 2013
Demon Stone is one of those utterly forgettable action games. Not a horrible game as such, but nothing about it makes it spectacular either.
Posted December 16, 2013
avatar
Ghorpm: No idea, I've never heard of it :)
that game has a brilliant intro : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDJdCafUAFA
Posted December 16, 2013
Overall, Demon Stone was indeed a poor port on PC. It's not horrible per se, but definitely a different game from everything in the series. It does have some nice music there and it can be fun if played on a console. On PC it's just frustrating. Still, there are worse games out there in our days.

Dragonshard - that could have been a great game. Instead, they kept it extremely short and conveniently forgot about it. The concept is good, it shows that you can do a strategy game in the D&D universe, but no one went further. The third race was intended for an expansion, but the poor sales stopped any chance for developing on the ideas introduced by Dragonshard. I'd still like seeing someone taking the concept further, but i don't get my hopes high.
Post edited December 16, 2013 by wolfsrain
Posted December 16, 2013
avatar
nijuu: This sounded like a game called Armies of Exiogo?..cant remember the exact spelling but that had fighting in overworld and underworld at the same time as well (or at least as i remember...)
avatar
Ghorpm: No idea, I've never heard of it :)
I'm not surprised that you've never heard of it. Aries of Exigo is a rather good (but not excellent) StarCraft clone (it might in theme look more like WarCraft, but it plays more similar to StarCraft). For some strange reason the game seem to have got next to no marketing, even though the game itself seem to be one that someone poured a lot of money into. I guess EA (the publisher) just did not believe that RTSs were contemporary...
If you can find a copy of it for cheap, then make sure to pick it up. It is worth your time.

As for Armies of Exigo compared to Dragonshard, the underworld sections are quite different in the two. In Armies of Exigo the underworld is another battlefield, while in Dragonshard the underworld works more like a slightly simplistic dungeon crawler, where the goal is to find resources which you in turn will use to supply your army. It's actually a neat idea, and works better than one might expect.
As for the rest of the game, Dragonshard is alright. It has its issues, and it has some neat ideas, but it all adds up to a game that won't leave a lasting impression. Play it if you are RTS starved.
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Demon Stone & Dragonshard. Opinions?(23 posts)(23 posts)
(23 posts)