Shining in the Darkness

[Melf]

Like RPGs? Good! We've got a review of the one that started the entire line of Shining games. Sega's 1991 monster adventure, Shining in the Darkness, ushered in a new era of quality titles that have all maintained some sort of relation to each other, and have spawned over fifteen entries on more than half a dozen consoles. Read on, and see where it all began.

[crazyjoedavola]

Dang. I was just playing through this and was ready to review this myself. I agree totally with the review. The first person graphics were very smooth and the game is tough. I especially liked the animated icons for your actions and, at the time, this was definitely groundbreaking. This game had such charm. The music added so much to the adventure. This is one of the first RPGs that got the adrenaline pumping during the battles for me. I only wish that Sega would have followed this up at some point (Saturn or Dreamcast) with an appropriate first person sequal. All in all though a great beginning to a great series.

[Demonic Weasel]

lol yeah, I agree. The closest thing to a follow up that I played was Shining the Holy Ark. It was about as good, but was more sophisticated and therefore had a different type of charm.

[Fang]

They are selling this game at gamecrazy for $13 dollars but this review didn't convince me to buy it. I don't like it that it's just in a dungeon. The game doesn't seem fun. I'm just used to the phantasy star type rpg or at least the landstalker type.

[Demonic Weasel]

In other words you're saying that if a game is set in a dungeon you won't buy it. Interesting.

[Genesis Knight]

I don't really care for RPG's exclusively set in dungeons, either. I like overworld stuff more.

[j_factor]

I like how it's a "small" game -- you're not saving the world, just your little town. I wish more RPGs were that intimate.

[Fang]

In other words you're saying that if a game is set in a dungeon you won't buy it. Interesting.

Well that would depend on what the game is about and if it doesn't get repetitive. I like rpgs with variety, that mix it up.

[Demonic Weasel]

Heh, yeah I think there's way too much emphasis on overworld roaming. The game actually doesn't get old, it's just hard. That's why people don't like it.

[Genesis Knight]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't like just roaming around. My tastes as far as locations, though, tend more towards the above-level parts of castles, towns, etc. I just don't like caves and dungeons much.

[Demonic Weasel]

I can understand that although for the most part I'm not ver particular about location. It just seems to me that most gamers these days say that a game has to be completely overworld roaming with thousands of sidequests or it hurts because of that.

[crazyjoedavola]

I never did finish this game so I don't know all of the details, but for me, the thing that made it so difficult was the fact that there was no mapping feature. The dungeon is quite massive and it's so easy to spend hours just trying to find your way if you don't make maps yourself. Like I said, there may be a mapping feature later in the game and I just haven't found it.

Still, the game does have a fair amount of charm.

[Demonic Weasel]

That's one of the things that I like about the game. It doesn't have a mapping feature and it makes the game so much harder. Still it's an awesome game.

[j_factor]

I liked the lack of a mapping feature. It made me bust out the pencil and paper and draw a map as if I were playing D&D or something.

[Demonic Weasel]

I never mapped at all. It took me two years to finish actually.