Sure thing, I just think it has several shortcomings even if you judge it for what it is. From the amount of information it provides and how it's displayed, to some needlessly complicated menus and systems, as well as a somewhat shallow battle system in rather blandly structured dungeons, it could use a bit of an overhaul in some areas. But I can also respect that it tries to recreate two classic games and heck, I have fun with it at times because it's so unassumingly old-school.
It feels a bit like the time I was playing Ys 1&2 three years ago. I could see how great the games were for its time, and how fun they still are, but also how far game design has come along over all these years and that kinda left me conflicted at how I ultimately felt about the games. In the end I decided to just have fun and play games, but the question how classics (and their remakes/remasters) should be viewed from an analytical point and judged, be it for oneself or as a public review, is still one I can't quite figure out.
But I'm getting way OT and just rumble on half-asleep, excuse me.
I think I'm gonna ditch my warrior some time in the future. I want to try the other classes, but knight/physician/magician/academic are just way to convenient to not have around, and without a samurai battles would take probably twice as much time, so the warrior feels like the only one that can be replaced without impacting overall performance much. Will probably try the monk.
How useful is the conjurer? The contract thingy seems pretty fun, although kind of a hassle to maintain.
