f



I miss the 80's/early 90's PC/C64 games

Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.

From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
were great for being a gamer.

For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
immersion... just tons of FUN.

What the heck happened!?

Since then.. and for the past 10 years or so.... memorable, quality
games, for me at least, have been few and far between - the Thief
series.. Half Life series....  umm.......... wow...... there just
isn't that much that blows away my memories of the 80's/90's.

Maybe it's just a matter of that time being in my youth, and now I'm
older and more grumpy, I don't know.. but you can't say there's a game
today that has that action/humor/story of Police Quest/Monkey Island..
heck, even Zork. IMO at least.
0
Psalm
1/2/2008 9:31:57 PM
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg 10727 articles. 0 followers. jonahnynla (1774) is leader. Post Follow

64 Replies
977 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 35

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:31:57 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
<meatnub@gmail.com> wrote:

>For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
>humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
>immersion... just tons of FUN.
>
>What the heck happened!?

A lot of the fun games these days are on consoles, PC gaming is
becoming way too serious.

As a multiplatform gamer 2007 was probably the best year ever for me
in nearly 30 years of gaming, but aside from Portal, all of the best
moments were not on PC.

I played some great games back in the day, but I keep them as fond
memories, because if I ever revisit them the reality of how crap they
now seem ruins the memories. Gaming is still great, you just may have
to expand your horizons a bit.
-- 
Andrew, contact via http://interpleb.googlepages.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
0
Andrew
1/2/2008 9:43:29 PM
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:31:57 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
<meatnub@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
>Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
>Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
>Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.
>
>From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
>were great for being a gamer.
>
>For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
>humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
>immersion... just tons of FUN.
>
>What the heck happened!?
>
>Since then.. and for the past 10 years or so.... memorable, quality
>games, for me at least, have been few and far between - the Thief
>series.. Half Life series....  umm.......... wow...... there just
>isn't that much that blows away my memories of the 80's/90's.
>
>Maybe it's just a matter of that time being in my youth, and now I'm
>older and more grumpy, I don't know.. but you can't say there's a game
>today that has that action/humor/story of Police Quest/Monkey Island..
>heck, even Zork. IMO at least.

Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
developers are afraid to take a real chance.

For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.

0
Tim
1/2/2008 10:19:19 PM
On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>
> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.

Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
remember the few gems.
0
WDS
1/2/2008 11:29:17 PM
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), WDS <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:

>Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>remember the few gems.

Also quite true!

0
Tim
1/3/2008 12:43:55 AM
On Jan 2, 2:31=A0pm, Psalm Nuclei <meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
> Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
> Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
> Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.
>
> From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
> were great for being a gamer.
>
> For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
> humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
> immersion... just tons of FUN.
>
> What the heck happened!?
>
> Since then.. and for the past 10 years or so.... memorable, quality
> games, for me at least, have been few and far between - the Thief
> series.. Half Life series.... =A0umm.......... wow...... there just
> isn't that much that blows away my memories of the 80's/90's.
>
> Maybe it's just a matter of that time being in my youth, and now I'm
> older and more grumpy, I don't know.. but you can't say there's a game
> today that has that action/humor/story of Police Quest/Monkey Island..
> heck, even Zork. IMO at least.

I didnt get into computers until about 96. I'd have to say that the
more recent games are much better all the way around for me. I never
got into the text based games but I hear they were fun for the time.

I'm a huge fan of tech so the newer the better as far as I'm
concerned. Hell, I dont even bitch about Vista...

Matt
0
gamefixer
1/3/2008 12:47:28 AM
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
wrote: 

>On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>>
>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
>
>Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>remember the few gems.

Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.

Those days are gone.

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/3/2008 2:21:21 AM
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:31:57 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Psalm
Nuclei wrote: 

>From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
>were great for being a gamer.

For C=64:

http://www.computerbrains.com/ccs64/

http://arnold.c64.org/

Have fun, but be prepared to have your memories "adjusted." ;^)

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/3/2008 2:23:19 AM
Zaghadka wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
> wrote: 
> 
>> On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
>>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
>>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
>>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>>>
>>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
>>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
>> Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>> remember the few gems.
> 
> Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
> minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
> was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
> 
> Those days are gone.


You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
so often.

http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html

0
Shawk
1/3/2008 2:31:25 AM
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 

>Zaghadka wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
>> wrote: 
>> 
>>> On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
>>>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
>>>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
>>>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>>>>
>>>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
>>>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
>>> Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>>> remember the few gems.
>> 
>> Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
>> minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
>> was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
>> 
>> Those days are gone.
>
>
>You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
>buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
>never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
>so often.
>
>http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html

Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
bank account.

I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)

The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as they
get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/3/2008 2:45:05 AM
Zaghadka wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 
> 
>> Zaghadka wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
>>> wrote: 
>>>
>>>> On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
>>>>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
>>>>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
>>>>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>>>>>
>>>>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
>>>>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
>>>> Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>>>> remember the few gems.
>>> Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
>>> minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
>>> was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
>>>
>>> Those days are gone.
>>
>> You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
>> buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
>> never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
>> so often.
>>
>> http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
> 
> Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
> clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
> though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
> bank account.
> 
> I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)
> 
> The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as they
> get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.


Yup, though it'll be interesting to see what happens to these daring but 
skilled devs when they get taken up by the majors like Valve...

0
Shawk
1/3/2008 2:48:00 AM
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:48:00 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 

>Zaghadka wrote:
>> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 
>> 
>>> Zaghadka wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
>>>> wrote: 
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
>>>>>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
>>>>>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
>>>>>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
>>>>>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
>>>>> Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>>>>> remember the few gems.
>>>> Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
>>>> minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
>>>> was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
>>>>
>>>> Those days are gone.
>>>
>>> You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
>>> buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
>>> never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
>>> so often.
>>>
>>> http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
>> 
>> Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
>> clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
>> though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
>> bank account.
>> 
>> I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)
>> 
>> The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as they
>> get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.
>
>
>Yup, though it'll be interesting to see what happens to these daring but 
>skilled devs when they get taken up by the majors like Valve...

Or (*gasp*) Pop-Cap. :^(

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/3/2008 2:53:37 AM
Psalm Nuclei <meatnub@gmail.com> wrote in news:9a956127-5110-417f-ae2c-
1fc424aabaf7@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

> Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
> Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
> Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
> Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.
> 
> From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
> were great for being a gamer.
> 
> For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
> humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
> immersion... just tons of FUN.
> 
> What the heck happened!?

Basically, the games and genres evolved (although not necessarily in a 
good way).

Text adventures gained graphics and/or better interfaces (if not longer 
lists of commands), RPGs gained more bells and whistles and, when they 
weren't in the arcade, the action game pioneers tried a new point of view 
and stuck with it ever since.  There's also been some 'combination' (of 
genres) and experimentation but that hasn't always worked. (Planescape 
and Cave Story, aside)

Still, if you miss the old days, there are ways to rekindle the flames 
(via the emulation of classic computers and consoles plus the 
modification/modernization of some classics) and some new worlds to 
explore if not ways to explore them. (check for the terms "best freeware 
games" and "interactive fiction" - you won't regret it)

> Maybe it's just a matter of that time being in my youth, and now I'm
> older and more grumpy, I don't know.. but you can't say there's a game
> today that has that action/humor/story of Police Quest/Monkey Island..
> heck, even Zork. IMO at least.

Fortunately, many of these titles are available for sale (if not legal 
download) so feel free to shop around before your next session online.

You may get lucky.

Signed,
Warewolf
who is certain that someone will play the 'piracy' card at some point.
0
Warewolf
1/3/2008 3:51:11 AM
Thus spake Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>, Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:45:05 GMT,
Anno Domini:

>>You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
>>buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
>>never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
>>so often.
>>
>>http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
>
>Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
>clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
>though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
>bank account.
>
>I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)
>
>The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as they
>get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.

Roguelike games like Angband would be _great_ games if they had much better
UIs so that learning the commands & how to play the game wasn't 90% of the
'fun'. Also, insta-death, with no real foreknowledge or ability to avoid it
on the player's part, should be a thing of the medieval gaming past, as far
as I'm concerned. Saving & loading incessantly (or restarting from scratch!)
isn't my idea of fun, though I know it is for many masochist gamers out
there.

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/3/2008 6:44:28 AM
Thus spake Warewolf <warewolfmypants@shaw.ca>, Thu, 03 Jan 2008 03:51:11
GMT, Anno Domini:

>Psalm Nuclei <meatnub@gmail.com> wrote in news:9a956127-5110-417f-ae2c-
>1fc424aabaf7@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
>> Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
>> Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
>> Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.
>> 
>> From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
>> were great for being a gamer.
>> 
>> For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
>> humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
>> immersion... just tons of FUN.
>> 
>> What the heck happened!?
>
>Basically, the games and genres evolved (although not necessarily in a 
>good way).
>
>Text adventures gained graphics and/or better interfaces (if not longer 
>lists of commands), RPGs gained more bells and whistles and, when they 
>weren't in the arcade, the action game pioneers tried a new point of view 
>and stuck with it ever since.  There's also been some 'combination' (of 
>genres) and experimentation but that hasn't always worked. (Planescape 
>and Cave Story, aside)
>
>Still, if you miss the old days, there are ways to rekindle the flames 
>(via the emulation of classic computers and consoles plus the 
>modification/modernization of some classics) and some new worlds to 
>explore if not ways to explore them. (check for the terms "best freeware 
>games" and "interactive fiction" - you won't regret it)
>
>> Maybe it's just a matter of that time being in my youth, and now I'm
>> older and more grumpy, I don't know.. but you can't say there's a game
>> today that has that action/humor/story of Police Quest/Monkey Island..
>> heck, even Zork. IMO at least.
>
>Fortunately, many of these titles are available for sale (if not legal 
>download) so feel free to shop around before your next session online.
>
>You may get lucky.
>
>Signed,
>Warewolf
>who is certain that someone will play the 'piracy' card at some point.

Yep, some fat Capitalist bastard who bought out the IP rights to games from
dying/long-dead software houses & will now hang onto them for 50 yrs,
milking each & every transaction like he somehow deserves it, for the
pittance he 'invested'. :)

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/3/2008 6:51:35 AM
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:43:29 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:31:57 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
><meatnub@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
>>humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
>>immersion... just tons of FUN.
>>
>>What the heck happened!?
>
>A lot of the fun games these days are on consoles, PC gaming is
>becoming way too serious.

I don't know about that. I bought Psychonauts (for PS2; I know there
is also a PC version but I played safe because I am not sure about the
PC HW requirements) because I seem to recall reading it is made by the
same people as Grim Fandango or some other PC game I used to like a
lot, even if it is more of an action game.

So far, I'm completely unimpressed. Grim Fandango blew me away with
its premise. Psychonauts, OTOH, just feels stupid, and seems to be
aimed at much younger audience than what Grim Fandango was. That is
the impression I get with most games (console vs PC). PC games can
still be tongue in the cheek, even if they are not made for kids. Jak
& Daxter and Ratchet & Clank seem like respectable 3D platform games,
but the humor and premise in them seems to appeal more to my kids than
me.

Check the "Best 2007 freeware games" thread in this group.

>As a multiplatform gamer 2007 was probably the best year ever for me
>in nearly 30 years of gaming, but aside from Portal, all of the best
>moments were not on PC.

So what were your bright and shining moments on consoles last year? I
promise not to criticize your picks out loud, just want to check if
there really is anything in which I also might be interested.

It is interesting to note though that now, many many years after the
existence of PSOne, I do find some gems from its wide game selection.
Maybe it helps that all the Tekken/Mario/Jak/Crash Bandicoot/generic
arcade racing-people have moved on to XBox360 and PS3 so it is easier
to discern the PSOne and PS2 gems from the big shining pile of poo.

Maybe that is also why I find it easier to find gems on older PC games
rather than new ones. With new games people concentrate on talking
about graphics, physics etc. (and bugs :D), while the true classics
remain for other merits than those initial wow-factors.

>I played some great games back in the day, but I keep them as fond
>memories, because if I ever revisit them the reality of how crap they
>now seem ruins the memories.

Depends what was the thing that made you amazed back in the day. If it
was mainly the graphics and sounds, it is no wonder they feel like
crap today when even better graphics, sounds and physics modelling is
available. I think the original Warcraft (1993?) is not so interesting
today not because its lores VGA graphics or bland sound effects, but
because the user interface is crap compared to newer RTS games, and
the gameplay may be too simple and straightforward by today's
standards.

As it happens, I don't have a proper home theater setup. The movies I
usually watch and like don't really need 5.1 surround sounds or full
HDTV resolutions for full effect. My friend is quite different: he has
all the latest home theater systems, Bluray + HD-DVD players etc., and
his movie collection seems to consist mostly of visually and aurally
pleasing movies like LotR and Matrix series etc. (I personally think
both LotR and Matrix were highly overrated movies, even if I was
initially woved by them as well). How many people are woved by
Jurassic Park movie today? Back in the early 90s it used to be the
shit (in the good way). I mean, come on, real looking dinos on
screen?!? Wow! Or how about the "Money for nothing" or "Let's get
rocked" music videos from the 80s, with their spectacular computer
generated human models?

As it happens, this friend of mine also prefers XBox360 and PS3 games
to PC games, because he feels it is just silly to play games on a
small-ish monitor or even a laptop and small multimedia speakers when
you can experience it all on a wall-sized Full-HD TV or projector etc.

I guess he is just looking for a different kind of experience in his
movies and games than I am. Not worse or better, just different.

0
riku
1/3/2008 9:01:18 AM
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), WDS <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:

>Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>remember the few gems.

True. Same goes for movies.

0
riku
1/3/2008 9:03:36 AM
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:21:21 GMT, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
>minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
>was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
>
>Those days are gone.

Not quite. I think the "Best freeware / independent games of 2007"
discussion can be one example of that. Developer's who can't or don't
need to compete with flashy visuals, orchestral music and
Hollywood-level voice acting, concentrate on other things.

It may be harder to make your living that way, though. Sad but true.

0
riku
1/3/2008 9:06:55 AM
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 16:47:28 -0800 (PST), gamefixer
<gamefixer@gmail.com> wrote:

>I didnt get into computers until about 96. I'd have to say that the
>more recent games are much better all the way around for me. I never
>got into the text based games but I hear they were fun for the time.

I played games in the 80s when text adventures (Infocom, Magnetic
Scrolls, early Sierra Online games etc.) were big. I must admit I
never liked them that much for the simple reason that more often than
not it wasn't enough to know what you needed to do, but you needed to
figure out what was the proper way to tell the stupid game to get it
done. It was a constant trial&error, fighting with the game user
interface (parser).

A bit similar as some of the point & click adventures where you had to
closely search every screen for hotspots just so that you wouldn't
miss anything, rather than concentrate on the puzzles and stories.

Nevertheless, I started losing interest in pure adventure games mainly
because being stuck in one room for several days trying to figure out
an illogical puzzle just didn't do it for me anymore. Nowadays it
would be far too easy to go to www.gamefaqs.com and check the solution
to every puzzle where you are stuck for more than 5 minutes. For
adventure games that destroys the experience like using cheat codes
for any other type of game, but then there you go.

0
riku
1/3/2008 9:18:18 AM
"Nostromo" <nospam@forme.org> wrote in message 
news:io0pn3ht9757ukq1s4uccbk8987ojk3b2k@4ax.com...
> Thus spake Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>, Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:45:05 GMT,
>
>>>You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a
>>>buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll
>>>never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every
>>>so often.

Thanks for the tip - looks interesting. Not many engrossing SP games being 
made nowadays.

>>Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff 
>>seems
>>clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
>>though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a 
>>large
>>bank account.

I think he meant Uplink. Not tried that one either - that looks interesting 
too. Another one to add to the watch list.

>>I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)
>>
>>The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as 
>>they
>>get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.
>
> Roguelike games like Angband would be _great_ games if they had much 
> better
> UIs so that learning the commands & how to play the game wasn't 90% of the
> 'fun'. Also, insta-death, with no real foreknowledge or ability to avoid 
> it
> on the player's part, should be a thing of the medieval gaming past, as 
> far
> as I'm concerned. Saving & loading incessantly (or restarting from 
> scratch!)
> isn't my idea of fun, though I know it is for many masochist gamers out
> there.

Nos, I think you are missing something important about roguelikes. Two 
things in fact:

(i) the UI is really not difficult. Most roguelikes have a help screen which 
shows you all available commands on a single screen, so there really can't 
be that much to get to grips with. Most of the commands are the first letter 
of the action: 'a' to aim a wand, 'f' to fire a missile, 'u' to use a staff 
etc. Admittedly it's a bit arbitrary that wands get aimed and rods get 
zapped, but it takes you all of about two minutes to learn. Also admittedly 
there are some roguelikes with pisspoor help sections (nothing beyond the 
screen of commands), but the good ones have comprehensive help text covering 
every command.

(ii) perma-death is an important part of the experience. Reloading from a 
previous save after you die is called "scumming" and will seriously hamper 
your enjoyment of the game - they're balanced so that anyone can win by 
scumming, but it takes both skill and luck to win without (which makes it 
extremely satisfying, so I'm told). So comparing them with RPGs which are 
designed to allow reloading after you get slaughtered is pointless, they're 
meant to give a totally different experience.

You refer to "insta-death" rather than "perma-death", which is a different 
problem. Yes, you can get into situations where you can be killed in a 
single attack - but you're never forced into them. Again, these games are 
much better balanced than you give them credit for. The one thing they lack 
is good graphics (you can play with graphical tiles, but I'm an ASCII 
purist, having been playing them since long before the tiles existed) - but 
as you know that doesn't detract from good gameplay.

Give Angband a proper try - I'd be very surprised if you weren't hooked by 
it.

CC 


0
Magnate
1/3/2008 10:48:37 AM
riku <riku@none.invalid.com> writes:

> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), WDS <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:
>
>>Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>>remember the few gems.
>
> True. Same goes for movies.

True enough for any movies other than those from Mr Spielberg.

Watched the original Star Wars recently - awesome. Ditto for Close
Encounters. And a complete 100% record with the Indiana Jones trilogy.

I liked your post about your friend with the Hone Theatre. I stay away
from friends with these. I know, I used to have one. It drove me
nuts. Totally different recording levels on all the channels per
film. Major fannying around required. And as you say, the only movies
which really "showed it off" were crap like the Matrix. The best for me
was probabaly Das Boot .... being "in the sub" was hair raising. But
like all novelties after a while it simply bored me. I watch all my
movies off my PC now and invariably just in normal stereo. You really
lose nothing from the enjoyment if you have an interest in the acting
and storyline.

I have always laughed at the fanboyz who harp on about "great gameplay"
from yesteryear. Those truly great games were very few and far between -
our standards were a lot, lot lower back then. Crikey, having an 8 bit
24x12 pixel main character wink at you would cause a 100% review back
then.

The only "old" games that still rock are, IMO, the original Unreal and
Half Life and of course system shock 2. I mentioned this a few months
ago, but the original Unreal still looks great running in SW mode on a
modern PC!


0
Walter
1/3/2008 11:31:16 AM
Psalm Nuclei <meatnub@gmail.com> wrote in
news:9a956127-5110-417f-ae2c-1fc424aabaf7@e6g2000prf.googlegro
ups.com: 

> Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of
> the Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka
> Another World, Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey
> Island series, Day of the Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's
> Revenge (C64) and so many more. 
> 
snip
Lotta crap back then because programming was so 'simple' every 
one could do it and try to make a kopec or two.  But I played 
and enjoyed the Zork series from Infocom (?) and the others from 
that company. Still have my "Don't Panic" button from 
"Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy".  Really got into the SSI 
series of Pool of Radiance & Krynn.  But what was state of the 
art back then I don't think I could stand twenty years later.  
When a modern video card requires more power than the rest of 
the computer its hard to deal with 16 color VGA.  Then Doom came 
out and it seemed everyone (then and now) started concentrating 
on FPS shooters...m
...m
0
magus
1/3/2008 1:52:40 PM
On Jan 2, 4:31 pm, Psalm Nuclei <meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
> Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
> Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
> Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.
>
> From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
> were great for being a gamer.
>
> For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
> humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
> immersion... just tons of FUN.
>
> What the heck happened!?
>
> Since then.. and for the past 10 years or so.... memorable, quality
> games, for me at least, have been few and far between - the Thief
> series.. Half Life series....  umm.......... wow...... there just
> isn't that much that blows away my memories of the 80's/90's.
>
> Maybe it's just a matter of that time being in my youth, and now I'm
> older and more grumpy, I don't know.. but you can't say there's a game
> today that has that action/humor/story of Police Quest/Monkey Island..
> heck, even Zork. IMO at least.
It's a different world my friend. Back in our days, we had to wait
until we got to a pay phone or a friend's house to call someone.
Nowadays people blink and they text message everybody how they did
it.  Attention spans have shortened to about a few seconds, it's
almost as if everybody has Attention Deficit Disorder.  Because of
that, all games are about instant action/gratification.
That means, that in RPGs for example, I don't remember last time I had
to take time to plan ahead, what classes, what skills, what stats to
use in my party.  Now most RPGs are single character with a sword in
their hand. Even in MMORPGs, you just spend a minute choosing a beard
style on your character's face and you're in.  Adventure games where
there is a puzzle that you have to use a match to light a torch are
deemed as 'too complex', and they include all sorts of in-game hints
everywhere.
Sadly, I don't see the trend changing. Soon games will just play by
themselves and you just sit and watch (I'd call that a movie)
0
Wolfing
1/3/2008 2:27:18 PM
In article <4qion3t32n20r608e7em2fsnhdrm2utu53@4ax.com>, 
zaghadka@hotmail.com says...
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 
> >You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
> >buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
> >never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
> >so often.
> >
> >http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
> 
> Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
> clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
> though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
> bank account.

Darwinia didn't work for me either.  I like Spiderweb, I think they do 
it right in terms of balance which is a very difficult thing.  Some 
recent games have gained a clunkiness feature which I hope they lose - 
I think they were trying to simplify the interface and went too far.  A 
minor thing though.  Spiderweb are still kings of the indie CRPG, 
unless you can't handle the retro graphics.

The indies can find their way onto the market too, either independently 
or via Real Networks or other publishers.  I think the recent indie 
game I most played to death was Oasis (Civ crossed with Minesweeper).  
This thread encouraged me to try 'Democracy', which seems complicated 
but interesting.  In RPG/Strategy I think Depths of Peril shows promise 
but I haven't time to get into it.
 
> I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)

Bah, Crawl is the greatest of the modern roguelikes!  I've gone off it 
now, though, but I played a good bit last year.

I actually wrote a little roguelike last year, if anyone's interested 
to try it.  Be warned, it's designed to be a hard and tactical one, and 
there are some unusual features (no natural health or mana 
regeneration, no experience from killing monsters).  It's perfectly 
winnable with any class though.

 <http://indigo.ie/~gerryq/lair/lair.htm>

Needs Windows and mouse control.

- Gerry Quinn


0
Gerry
1/3/2008 3:28:11 PM
In article <a4qu45-5ug.ln1@baba.sadnet>, contact.me@some.other.way 
says...

> (ii) perma-death is an important part of the experience. Reloading from a 
> previous save after you die is called "scumming" and will seriously hamper 
> your enjoyment of the game - they're balanced so that anyone can win by 
> scumming, but it takes both skill and luck to win without (which makes it 
> extremely satisfying, so I'm told). So comparing them with RPGs which are 
> designed to allow reloading after you get slaughtered is pointless, they're 
> meant to give a totally different experience.

I took a different approach with mine ('Lair of the Demon Ape')
<http://indigo.ie/~gerryq/lair/lair.htm>.  The game saves automatically 
at the end of each level (there are seven levels), but nowhere else.  
Players are encouraged to choose their own rules about reloading after 
death;  full ironman, a limited allowance of reloads, or just powering 
through to see the entire game - all are okay with me.

The nice thing is that anytime you load you start with a fresh new 
level, so there is no baggage to remember.

- Gerry Quinn


 
0
Gerry
1/3/2008 3:35:31 PM
Warewolf wrote:
> Psalm Nuclei <meatnub@gmail.com> wrote in news:9a956127-5110-417f-ae2c-
> 1fc424aabaf7@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> 
> 
>>Hero's Quest, Police Quest, Pools of Radiance, Zork, Eye of the
>>Beholder, Legend of Kyrandia, Out of this world aka Another World,
>>Wasteland, Fallout, Doom, Duke Nukem, Monkey Island series, Day of the
>>Tentacle, Fandango, Montazuma's Revenge (C64) and so many more.
>>
>>From Atari, to the Commodore 64, to the PC, the 80's and early 90's
>>were great for being a gamer.
>>
>>For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
>>humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
>>immersion... just tons of FUN.
>>
>>What the heck happened!?
> 
> 
> Basically, the games and genres evolved (although not necessarily in a 
> good way).

Market devolved in concert with the hardware evolution. I've thought 
about it and decided me and people like me are to blame.<sic>

In the 70's-90's we used games as electronic baby sitters. That 
generation has now come of age and brought their contemporaries with them.

If there was a platform that didn't have games available for that 
purpose only people w/o children would buy it.

I mean I didn't get into computers until fairly late, circa 1978 or so. 
Most of my friends had already been on school computers or been 
employeed in the industry or built their own computers well before that. 
I say without fear of contradiction that I was the dumbest of the bunch. 
Now when I think of possible Xmas gifts for my grandchildren I think in 
terms of "What consols has the best games for a 3 year old?"

So you have game developers dumbing down games. Nothing wrong if it 
appeals to Generation Social Security but you had better make it so it 
can be played by the Generation Pampers too if you want to capture the 
biggest market share.

Rick
0
Rick
1/3/2008 4:35:15 PM
On Jan 2, 8:45 pm, Zaghadka <zagha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote:
> >Zaghadka wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
> >>>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
> >>>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
> >>>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>
> >>>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
> >>>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
> >>> Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
> >>> remember the few gems.
>
> >> Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
> >> minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
> >> was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
>
> >> Those days are gone.
>
> >You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a
> >buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll
> >never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every
> >so often.
>
> >http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
>
> Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
> clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
> though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
> bank account.
>
> I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)

I played NetHack to death a few years ago.  I almost ascended (I
didn't make it throughthe plane of earth) and after that I just
couldn't bear to restart yet again.

> The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as they
> get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.

Huh?
0
WDS
1/3/2008 4:46:51 PM
On Jan 3, 12:44 am, Nostromo <nos...@forme.org> wrote:
> Roguelike games like Angband would be _great_ games if they had much better
> UIs so that learning the commands & how to play the game wasn't 90% of the
> 'fun'. Also, insta-death, with no real foreknowledge or ability to avoid it
> on the player's part, should be a thing of the medieval gaming past, as far
> as I'm concerned. Saving & loading incessantly (or restarting from scratch!)
> isn't my idea of fun, though I know it is for many masochist gamers out
> there.

The problem is that NetHack requires too much thinking for a console
action gamer like you.  ;-)
0
WDS
1/3/2008 4:48:12 PM
On Jan 3, 10:35 am, Rick Cortese <ricor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> So you have game developers dumbing down games. Nothing wrong if it
> appeals to Generation Social Security but you had better make it so it
> can be played by the Generation Pampers too if you want to capture the
> biggest market share.

Writing a game targetting a different audience is not "dumbing it
down".  Or do you consider The Cat in the Hat a dumbed down version of
The Illiad?
0
WDS
1/3/2008 4:53:33 PM
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:29:17 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
> wrote: 
>>On Jan 2, 4:19 pm, Tim O <tim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Games used to be one or two man teams with a vision.
>>> Now they are 60 person teams guided by stockholder committees and
>>> focus groups. Games are multi-million dollar producitons, so most
>>> developers are afraid to take a real chance.
>>>
>>> For that reason, just as in movies which are controlled the same way,
>>> you get a few standout titles and a bunch of safe and tepid crap.
>>
>>Most old games were steaming piles of useless crap, though.  We only
>>remember the few gems.
> 
> Bingo, and since the penalty for making a steaming pile of crap was quite
> minimal, you didn't have any venture capitalists or major studios on board, it
> was easier to be agile and daring as a developer.
> 
> Those days are gone.

Mostly, but not completely. There are still a few two-man teams that focus
on gameplay rather than eye candy, but they are rare, and since they don't
have million-dollar advertising budgets, you don't hear as much from them.


mcv.
-- 
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real.                  -- Zachriel
0
mcv
1/3/2008 6:45:09 PM
in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Gerry Quinn <gerryq@indigo.ie> wrote in 
news:MPG.21e70f663448a89498be99@news1.eircom.net:

> I actually wrote a little roguelike last year, if anyone's interested 
> to try it.  Be warned, it's designed to be a hard and tactical one, and 
> there are some unusual features (no natural health or mana 
> regeneration, no experience from killing monsters).  It's perfectly 
> winnable with any class though.
> 
>  <http://indigo.ie/~gerryq/lair/lair.htm>
> 
> Needs Windows and mouse control.

I downloaded it and am playing it, however there seems to be something 
wierd, unless I am completely misunderstanding it. I am playing with the 
Wizard, but no matter which weapon I try to weild (be it sword, Razor darts 
or short bow) it always uses the short bow.

-- 
Marcel
0
Marcel
1/3/2008 7:06:01 PM
WDS wrote:
> On Jan 3, 10:35 am, Rick Cortese <ricor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
>>So you have game developers dumbing down games. Nothing wrong if it
>>appeals to Generation Social Security but you had better make it so it
>>can be played by the Generation Pampers too if you want to capture the
>>biggest market share.
> 
> 
> Writing a game targetting a different audience is not "dumbing it
> down".  Or do you consider The Cat in the Hat a dumbed down version of
> The Illiad?

By all measures yes. Subject matter, moral questions, vocabulary, you 
name it. You aren't going to get a LotR level literature in a game 
targeted for kids with a 300 word vocabulary. Much better then: Orc and 
Troll ran up a hill to fetch a pail of water.

Rick
0
Rick
1/3/2008 9:06:24 PM
In article <Xns9A1A8F70147B2marcelbeaudoingmailc@130.133.1.4>, 
marcel.beaudoin@gmail.com says...
> in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Gerry Quinn <gerryq@indigo.ie> wrote in 
> news:MPG.21e70f663448a89498be99@news1.eircom.net:
> 
> > I actually wrote a little roguelike last year, if anyone's interested 
> > to try it.  Be warned, it's designed to be a hard and tactical one, and 
> > there are some unusual features (no natural health or mana 
> > regeneration, no experience from killing monsters).  It's perfectly 
> > winnable with any class though.
> > 
> >  <http://indigo.ie/~gerryq/lair/lair.htm>
> > 
> > Needs Windows and mouse control.
> 
> I downloaded it and am playing it, however there seems to be something 
> wierd, unless I am completely misunderstanding it. I am playing with the 
> Wizard, but no matter which weapon I try to weild (be it sword, Razor darts 
> or short bow) it always uses the short bow.

Select current weapon with F1..F4 and LEFT-click on the monster to use 
it.  Right-clicking always uses the bow (added at users' request, but I 
guess it can also lead to confusion!)

- Gerry Quinn
0
Gerry
1/3/2008 9:43:33 PM
Thus spake "Magnate" <contact.me@some.other.way>, Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:48:37
GMT, Anno Domini:

>Nos, I think you are missing something important about roguelikes. Two 
>things in fact:
>
>(i) the UI is really not difficult. Most roguelikes have a help screen which 
>shows you all available commands on a single screen, so there really can't 
>be that much to get to grips with. Most of the commands are the first letter 
>of the action: 'a' to aim a wand, 'f' to fire a missile, 'u' to use a staff 
>etc. Admittedly it's a bit arbitrary that wands get aimed and rods get 
>zapped, but it takes you all of about two minutes to learn. Also admittedly 
>there are some roguelikes with pisspoor help sections (nothing beyond the 
>screen of commands), but the good ones have comprehensive help text covering 
>every command.

Angband had very comprehensive help...which is why I spent most of my time
there.

>(ii) perma-death is an important part of the experience. Reloading from a 
>previous save after you die is called "scumming" and will seriously hamper 
>your enjoyment of the game - they're balanced so that anyone can win by 
>scumming, but it takes both skill and luck to win without (which makes it 
>extremely satisfying, so I'm told). So comparing them with RPGs which are 
>designed to allow reloading after you get slaughtered is pointless, they're 
>meant to give a totally different experience.

I'm well aware of those factors above. I spent many hours earlier in the
year learning how to play Angband. Note 'learning how to play', not really
playing. A game shouldn't need a hundred different single letter commands,
most totally unintuitive, to be functional. It was like learning Unix all
over again, except no one was paying me & it wasn't the early 80s :). The UI
shouldn't need hours & hours to be mastered - it should be intuitive &
easily accessible - memorising 100 letters/commands is not any kind of
achievement or fun as far as I'm concerned, but a waste of good memory
cells. Which is why I spent most of my 20+ hours on Angband switching to &
from the help screen wondering if I was missing something at each step. And
I consider myself to have a fairly good memory for detail.

>You refer to "insta-death" rather than "perma-death", which is a different 
>problem. Yes, you can get into situations where you can be killed in a 
>single attack - but you're never forced into them. Again, these games are 
>much better balanced than you give them credit for. The one thing they lack 
>is good graphics (you can play with graphical tiles, but I'm an ASCII 
>purist, having been playing them since long before the tiles existed) - but 
>as you know that doesn't detract from good gameplay.
>
>Give Angband a proper try - I'd be very surprised if you weren't hooked by 
>it.

I did. I wasn't. I see the attraction, just as I intellectually understand
one man's attraction to another, but it's not for me. ;-p

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/4/2008 12:01:59 AM
Thus spake WDS <Bill@seurer.net>, Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:48:12 -0800 (PST), Anno
Domini:

>On Jan 3, 12:44 am, Nostromo <nos...@forme.org> wrote:
>> Roguelike games like Angband would be _great_ games if they had much better
>> UIs so that learning the commands & how to play the game wasn't 90% of the
>> 'fun'. Also, insta-death, with no real foreknowledge or ability to avoid it
>> on the player's part, should be a thing of the medieval gaming past, as far
>> as I'm concerned. Saving & loading incessantly (or restarting from scratch!)
>> isn't my idea of fun, though I know it is for many masochist gamers out
>> there.
>
>The problem is that NetHack requires too much thinking for a console
>action gamer like you.  ;-)

SONUVA...!!!

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/4/2008 12:02:25 AM
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:48:37 GMT, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Magnate wrote: 

>I think he meant Uplink

Yup. That's it. I'ts been a while.

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/4/2008 7:52:13 AM
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:48:12 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
wrote: 

>On Jan 3, 12:44 am, Nostromo <nos...@forme.org> wrote:
>> Roguelike games like Angband would be _great_ games if they had much better
>> UIs so that learning the commands & how to play the game wasn't 90% of the
>> 'fun'. Also, insta-death, with no real foreknowledge or ability to avoid it
>> on the player's part, should be a thing of the medieval gaming past, as far
>> as I'm concerned. Saving & loading incessantly (or restarting from scratch!)
>> isn't my idea of fun, though I know it is for many masochist gamers out
>> there.
>
>The problem is that NetHack requires too much thinking for a console
>action gamer like you.  ;-)

Ouch! That was a kick in the nuts. <BFG>

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/4/2008 7:53:22 AM
Still about the subject ("Did game use to be better than today"):

From my point of view the good news with newer games is that the game
worlds have become and continue to become more believable all the time
due to increased processing power. Graphics, physics and enemy/NPC AI.
When the kids of today get used to NPC behaviour in games like Grand
Theft Auto and Assassin's Creed, they can't understand how anyone
could stomach playing games where the enemies are 2D cartoon cutouts
which are charging directly to you, and NPCs were just standing there
doing nothing expect if you talked to them.

On the other hand, it does feel to me that games in general have
become both shorter and have an easier learning curve, ie. "dumbed
down" from what they used to be in their peak (I don't think anyone
would argue that games of today are dumber than the arcade ripoffs in
the early 80s).

If people don't want to play games where the game world is on not the
level of GTA and Assassin's Creed, less and less developers have
resources to concentrate on other things besides the believable game
world. And maybe the masses do require shorter games. I have heard
quite a few grown-ups saying too that if they play console or PC game,
they want it to be simple fun which they can just pick up and forget
on a whim. They don't want to get into anything which they have to
"learn" to play. In a way understandable, but still unfortunate if
most people are like that because it does ensure the dumbing down of
games.

0
riku
1/4/2008 8:24:29 AM
Thus spake Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>, Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:53:22 GMT,
Anno Domini:

>On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:48:12 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
>wrote: 
>
>>On Jan 3, 12:44 am, Nostromo <nos...@forme.org> wrote:
>>> Roguelike games like Angband would be _great_ games if they had much better
>>> UIs so that learning the commands & how to play the game wasn't 90% of the
>>> 'fun'. Also, insta-death, with no real foreknowledge or ability to avoid it
>>> on the player's part, should be a thing of the medieval gaming past, as far
>>> as I'm concerned. Saving & loading incessantly (or restarting from scratch!)
>>> isn't my idea of fun, though I know it is for many masochist gamers out
>>> there.
>>
>>The problem is that NetHack requires too much thinking for a console
>>action gamer like you.  ;-)
>
>Ouch! That was a kick in the nuts. <BFG>

What character combo did he have to hit for that do you think? Let me check
the help/manual pages ;-p

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/4/2008 8:31:50 AM
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:46:51 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
wrote: 

>> The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as they
>> get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.
>
>Huh?

I apologize. It's my own meme, and I should hardly expect anyone else to know
what I mean when I say it.

There seems, to me, to be a tautological and specious belief that small,
independent software developers are superior simply by virtue of being small,
independent software developers. That they don't have to deliver a basic level
of polish and professionalism because their games are "independent" and
therefore "cutting edge."

But that's all marketing BS. A cool idea can't sell a game when you're
delivering the same crap graphics, generation after generation (Spiderweb, I'm
talking to you), and clearly having your cousin draw them for free (Spiderweb!
Dammit!), for instance.

There have been a number of articles written about this, that the goal of the
independent game studio is to, for lack of better words, "bring down the
establishment." A tongue-in-cheek "Gamer's Manifesto" is easily Googled as
representative of this attitude. It demonstrates frustration with the
mainstream, which is pretty slick and is getting lapped up by millions, rather
than what will bring gaming forward past the lack of innovation, which is a
smaller and not as significant problem.

There are other such "manifestoes" around the web, though they may not be
labeled as such.

The frustration of such articles is *really* with the mass market. With the
people who buy mediocre, but slick, games by the million and make them
successes, after all.

I don't play games to rebel against the mainstream, and some of the indy
developers don't quite seem to understand that yet. Their marketers expect me
to lap up crapware because I'm dissatisfied with the mainstream. I'm more
likely to just stop playing. I'm certainly more likely to lap up the admittedly
really *slick* crapware of the mainstream than lap up poor-quality crapware
because I bear a rebellious mien.

Take, as exhibit "a", the "about us:" page of Introversion:

http://www.introversion.co.uk/aboutus.html

Look at all the off-center, black and white photos. It looks like the cover of
"The Joshua Tree." They're selling an image: They all read Beckett and Satre
and eat baguette at French cafes. This certainly can't be a bunch of people who
write shooty bang bang games that basically rip off 80's meme's from "Tron" and
"Wargames." No. They're "artistes."

I think the independents need to get over this. They need to present a
professional, not "AAA" but at least "B" grade, product, and not assume that
their "coolness" as "the alternative" is going to sell games to me, the
currently unimpressed consumer.

They need, therefore, to get past being upstarts who base their marketing on a
beatnik image and towards providing really slick games. They need to go into
business entertaining us, instead of committing a sort of "stylish" rebellion.
I expect that quality, not rebellion, will generate sufficient interest in
their products.

Small Rockets does this pretty well, for instance. No pretention at all on
their pages. I quite like "Star Monkey" (It's just a shooter).

HTH.

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/4/2008 8:32:57 AM
"Zaghadka" <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:diprn3ttc42roeees25d4flo8fm8ch7suv@4ax.com...
> Small Rockets does this pretty well, for instance. No pretention at all on
> their pages. I quite like "Star Monkey" (It's just a shooter).
>
> HTH.
>
> -- 
> Zag
>
Man I haven't heard anyone bring up Star Monkey in a long time. This is a 
great little game, which is getting on in years, but is still a lot of fun 
to play. Although I did have some problems playing it in XP if I recall. Ran 
great in Win 98. I have it somewhere I should give it another go. It's been 
years.
Best part of the game was how easy it was to configure the .ini file. It was 
a breeze to change just about everything in the game. JLC 


0
JLC
1/4/2008 9:05:01 AM
"Nostromo" <nospam@forme.org> wrote in message 
news:u8tqn3p0s2ve7atate58m5u617gjce35r4@4ax.com...
> Thus spake "Magnate" <contact.me@some.other.way>, Thu, 03 Jan 2008 
> 10:48:37
>
>>Nos, I think you are missing something important about roguelikes. Two
>>things in fact:
>>
>>(i) the UI is really not difficult. Most roguelikes have a help screen 
>>which
>>shows you all available commands on a single screen, so there really can't
>>be that much to get to grips with. Most of the commands are the first 
>>letter
>>of the action: 'a' to aim a wand, 'f' to fire a missile, 'u' to use a 
>>staff
>>etc. Admittedly it's a bit arbitrary that wands get aimed and rods get
>>zapped, but it takes you all of about two minutes to learn. Also 
>>admittedly
>>there are some roguelikes with pisspoor help sections (nothing beyond the
>>screen of commands), but the good ones have comprehensive help text 
>>covering
>>every command.
>
> Angband had very comprehensive help...which is why I spent most of my time
> there.
>
>>(ii) perma-death is an important part of the experience. Reloading from a
>>previous save after you die is called "scumming" and will seriously hamper
>>your enjoyment of the game - they're balanced so that anyone can win by
>>scumming, but it takes both skill and luck to win without (which makes it
>>extremely satisfying, so I'm told). So comparing them with RPGs which are
>>designed to allow reloading after you get slaughtered is pointless, 
>>they're
>>meant to give a totally different experience.
>
> I'm well aware of those factors above. I spent many hours earlier in the
> year learning how to play Angband. Note 'learning how to play', not really
> playing. A game shouldn't need a hundred different single letter commands,
> most totally unintuitive, to be functional. It was like learning Unix all
> over again, except no one was paying me & it wasn't the early 80s :). The 
> UI
> shouldn't need hours & hours to be mastered - it should be intuitive &
> easily accessible - memorising 100 letters/commands is not any kind of
> achievement or fun as far as I'm concerned, but a waste of good memory
> cells. Which is why I spent most of my 20+ hours on Angband switching to &
> from the help screen wondering if I was missing something at each step. 
> And
> I consider myself to have a fairly good memory for detail.

I'm afraid I just don't see your problem here. Sure there are a lot of 
commands in Angband, but the important ones can be boiled down to these:

(cursor keys): move, attack, disarm trap, open door
a/u/z - aim a wand/use a staff/zap a rod (these are combined in a single 
command in some variants)
q - quaff a potion
r - read a scroll
w - wear/wield an item
f - fire a missile (from your equipped launcher)
v - throw an item (without using the launcher)
d - drop an item
m - cast a spell

To me that's no more difficult than learning your way around the consolised 
icons of modern RPGs (or even older RPGs like BG etc.).

>>You refer to "insta-death" rather than "perma-death", which is a different
>>problem. Yes, you can get into situations where you can be killed in a
>>single attack - but you're never forced into them. Again, these games are
>>much better balanced than you give them credit for. The one thing they 
>>lack
>>is good graphics (you can play with graphical tiles, but I'm an ASCII
>>purist, having been playing them since long before the tiles existed) - 
>>but
>>as you know that doesn't detract from good gameplay.
>>
>>Give Angband a proper try - I'd be very surprised if you weren't hooked by
>>it.
>
> I did. I wasn't. I see the attraction, just as I intellectually understand
> one man's attraction to another, but it's not for me. ;-p

Well that's fair enough, it's good that you gave it a fair tryout. I don't 
think you should blame your dislike of it on the UI though, it really isn't 
that bad. You just didn't like the way it played, which is fine.

CC 


0
Magnate
1/4/2008 11:47:28 AM
"Zaghadka" <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:diprn3ttc42roeees25d4flo8fm8ch7suv@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:46:51 -0800 (PST), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, WDS
> wrote:
>
>>> The indy scene will eventually kick into high gear, I think. As soon as 
>>> they
>>> get past the "manifesto" stage and start producing good games.
>>
>>Huh?
>
> I apologize. It's my own meme, and I should hardly expect anyone else to 
> know
> what I mean when I say it.
>
> There seems, to me, to be a tautological and specious belief that small,
> independent software developers are superior simply by virtue of being 
> small,
> independent software developers. That they don't have to deliver a basic 
> level
> of polish and professionalism because their games are "independent" and
> therefore "cutting edge."
[snip]
> They need, therefore, to get past being upstarts who base their marketing 
> on a
> beatnik image and towards providing really slick games. They need to go 
> into
> business entertaining us, instead of committing a sort of "stylish" 
> rebellion.
> I expect that quality, not rebellion, will generate sufficient interest in
> their products.
>
> Small Rockets does this pretty well, for instance. No pretention at all on
> their pages. I quite like "Star Monkey" (It's just a shooter).

Another great essay Zag - thanks for that. What intrigues me about this is 
that they're trying to compete in a system which is biased against them 
(because they lack the big marketing dollars, as mcv said in another post). 
Instead of trying to compete using cool B/W photos and image, IMO they 
should try to change the system. That means coming up with a new 
payment/distribution model to bypass the major studios. A bit like Daniel 
Bedingfield did with his music - he couldn't get a record deal so he 
recorded his songs on his computer and promoted/released them on the net, 
and got to the top of the charts that way. (I can't bear his music but have 
great respect for him bucking the system - even though he's now with a major 
label I think.) I might sound old hat now but it was revolutionary when he 
did it. I'm sure there is the same possibility for games developers.

CC 


0
Magnate
1/4/2008 12:05:31 PM
In article <diprn3ttc42roeees25d4flo8fm8ch7suv@4ax.com>, 
zaghadka@hotmail.com says...

> There seems, to me, to be a tautological and specious belief that small,
> independent software developers are superior simply by virtue of being small,
> independent software developers. That they don't have to deliver a basic level
> of polish and professionalism because their games are "independent" and
> therefore "cutting edge."
> 
> But that's all marketing BS. A cool idea can't sell a game when you're
> delivering the same crap graphics, generation after generation (Spiderweb, I'm
> talking to you), and clearly having your cousin draw them for free (Spiderweb!
> Dammit!), for instance.

It does depend.  I bought Geneforge 4 because it's a good game, and I 
don't mind the graphics (they are basic but at least simple and clear).  
I agree that it is also perfectly reasonable to dismiss Spiderweb games 
on graphic grounds, though.  Standards can vary.  However, if Spiderweb 
decided to invest in prettying up their games, they could easily fall 
between two stools - a half-prettified version might well look worse 
than the original.

But I agree that games must meet certain standards of polish and 
professionalism.  Being 'innovative' or being made by a small company 
are not intrinsically valuable qualities in a game.
 
- Gerry Quinn
0
Gerry
1/4/2008 2:54:49 PM
In article <e7j155-4p4.ln1@baba.sadnet>, contact.me@some.other.way 
says...

> Another great essay Zag - thanks for that. What intrigues me about this is 
> that they're trying to compete in a system which is biased against them 
> (because they lack the big marketing dollars, as mcv said in another post). 
> Instead of trying to compete using cool B/W photos and image, IMO they 
> should try to change the system. That means coming up with a new 
> payment/distribution model to bypass the major studios.

Payment and distribution systems are pretty trivial.  The hard part is 
marketing.

- Gerry Quinn
0
Gerry
1/4/2008 2:58:29 PM
On Jan 3, 6:02 pm, Nostromo <nos...@forme.org> wrote:
> Thus spake WDS <B...@seurer.net>, Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:48:12 -0800 (PST)
> >The problem is that NetHack requires too much thinking for a console
> >action gamer like you.  ;-)
>
> SONUVA...!!!

The truth hurts sometimes.
0
WDS
1/4/2008 4:13:47 PM
"Gerry Quinn" <gerryq@indigo.ie> wrote in message 
news:MPG.21e859147128018198bea1@news1.eircom.net...
> In article <diprn3ttc42roeees25d4flo8fm8ch7suv@4ax.com>,
> zaghadka@hotmail.com says...
>
>> There seems, to me, to be a tautological and specious belief that small,
>> independent software developers are superior simply by virtue of being 
>> small,
>> independent software developers. That they don't have to deliver a basic 
>> level
>> of polish and professionalism because their games are "independent" and
>> therefore "cutting edge."
>>
>> But that's all marketing BS. A cool idea can't sell a game when you're
>> delivering the same crap graphics, generation after generation 
>> (Spiderweb, I'm
>> talking to you), and clearly having your cousin draw them for free 
>> (Spiderweb!
>> Dammit!), for instance.
>
> It does depend.  I bought Geneforge 4 because it's a good game, and I
> don't mind the graphics (they are basic but at least simple and clear).
> I agree that it is also perfectly reasonable to dismiss Spiderweb games
> on graphic grounds, though.  Standards can vary.  However, if Spiderweb
> decided to invest in prettying up their games, they could easily fall
> between two stools - a half-prettified version might well look worse
> than the original.
>
> But I agree that games must meet certain standards of polish and
> professionalism.  Being 'innovative' or being made by a small company
> are not intrinsically valuable qualities in a game.

Being innovative *is* intrinsically valuable - it's just not sufficient.

CC 


0
Magnate
1/4/2008 5:08:39 PM
"Gerry Quinn" <gerryq@indigo.ie> wrote in message 
news:MPG.21e859ec46362b8498bea2@news1.eircom.net...
> In article <e7j155-4p4.ln1@baba.sadnet>, contact.me@some.other.way
> says...
>
>> Another great essay Zag - thanks for that. What intrigues me about this 
>> is
>> that they're trying to compete in a system which is biased against them
>> (because they lack the big marketing dollars, as mcv said in another 
>> post).
>> Instead of trying to compete using cool B/W photos and image, IMO they
>> should try to change the system. That means coming up with a new
>> payment/distribution model to bypass the major studios.
>
> Payment and distribution systems are pretty trivial.  The hard part is
> marketing.

I disagree. Marketing is easy - especially on the net - once you have a 
winning formula (product plus payment model). People will do it for you.

CC 


0
Magnate
1/4/2008 5:08:39 PM
Ah, I thought you were referring to the way some projects
spend more time announcing the start of the process to
decide which meeting formats will be used to choose
the team to create their killer game.  Yep, we have a
web site, and a manifesto, but I feel we're missing
something...

http://www.happypenguin.org/newsitem?id=7912

--
Darin Johnson
0
Darin
1/4/2008 8:19:11 PM
On Jan 3, 1:18 am, riku <r...@none.invalid.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 16:47:28 -0800 (PST), gamefixer
>
> <gamefi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I didnt get into computers until about 96. I'd have to say that the
> >more recent games are much better all the way around for me. I never
> >got into the text based games but I hear they were fun for the time.
>
> I played games in the 80s when text adventures (Infocom, Magnetic
> Scrolls, early Sierra Online games etc.) were big. I must admit I
> never liked them that much for the simple reason that more often than
> not it wasn't enough to know what you needed to do, but you needed to
> figure out what was the proper way to tell the stupid game to get it
> done. It was a constant trial&error, fighting with the game user
> interface (parser).
>
> A bit similar as some of the point & click adventures where you had to
> closely search every screen for hotspots just so that you wouldn't
> miss anything, rather than concentrate on the puzzles and stories.
>
> Nevertheless, I started losing interest in pure adventure games mainly
> because being stuck in one room for several days trying to figure out
> an illogical puzzle just didn't do it for me anymore. Nowadays it
> would be far too easy to go towww.gamefaqs.comand check the solution
> to every puzzle where you are stuck for more than 5 minutes. For
> adventure games that destroys the experience like using cheat codes
> for any other type of game, but then there you go.

Yep.  Too easy to get hold of the answers these days.  I think that's
what really killed adventure games, and to a lesser extent certain
RPGs with puzzle elements.  I never liked being stuck very long.
Portal was ridiculously easy by the old standards, but yet I was still
tempted to go to the web.  I managed to get through it without doing
so, and I'm proud of myself for having done so, but now I'm stuck on
the last advanced room, and I haven't a clue.  And all I have is my
pride.

- Justisaur
0
Justisaur
1/4/2008 10:58:37 PM
Thus spake "Magnate" <contact.me@some.other.way>, Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:47:28
GMT, Anno Domini:

>I'm afraid I just don't see your problem here. Sure there are a lot of 
>commands in Angband, but the important ones can be boiled down to these:
>
>(cursor keys): move, attack, disarm trap, open door
>a/u/z - aim a wand/use a staff/zap a rod (these are combined in a single 
>command in some variants)
>q - quaff a potion
>r - read a scroll
>w - wear/wield an item
>f - fire a missile (from your equipped launcher)
>v - throw an item (without using the launcher)
>d - drop an item
>m - cast a spell
>
>To me that's no more difficult than learning your way around the consolised 
>icons of modern RPGs (or even older RPGs like BG etc.).

It's just ambiguous & annoying at every turn until you get used to it. It's
like the old adventure game parsers where you're looking for the right
command for every situation. Ask yourself why for such a 'simple' game the
manual pages are so vast.

>>>You refer to "insta-death" rather than "perma-death", which is a different
>>>problem. Yes, you can get into situations where you can be killed in a
>>>single attack - but you're never forced into them. Again, these games are
>>>much better balanced than you give them credit for. The one thing they 
>>>lack
>>>is good graphics (you can play with graphical tiles, but I'm an ASCII
>>>purist, having been playing them since long before the tiles existed) - 
>>>but
>>>as you know that doesn't detract from good gameplay.
>>>
>>>Give Angband a proper try - I'd be very surprised if you weren't hooked by
>>>it.
>>
>> I did. I wasn't. I see the attraction, just as I intellectually understand
>> one man's attraction to another, but it's not for me. ;-p
>
>Well that's fair enough, it's good that you gave it a fair tryout. I don't 
>think you should blame your dislike of it on the UI though, it really isn't 
>that bad. You just didn't like the way it played, which is fine.

Probably, but the UI & slow start to what it basically a _very_ simple game
probably killed it for me. That's not to say I didn't enjoy what time I
spent, but the factors I've mentioned mean I'll never finish it. And I'm
probably in the majority. Why someone would want to make a game for the
maso-minority is a mystery to me.

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/5/2008 12:37:11 AM
Thus spake Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>, Fri, 04 Jan 2008 08:32:57 GMT,
Anno Domini:

<snip>

>They need, therefore, to get past being upstarts who base their marketing on a
>beatnik image and towards providing really slick games. They need to go into
>business entertaining us, instead of committing a sort of "stylish" rebellion.
>I expect that quality, not rebellion, will generate sufficient interest in
>their products.

How do you prevent the endless cycle of fame & fortune turning these good
indies into the larger money-hungry beast? Lest we all forget the origins of
devs like ID Software, Bioware & Blizzard, & the fate of others like Origin
Systems, Black Isle & Troika. Seems most people don't want sustained
originality & true style - they prefer slickness & false style & that's
where the money is long-term. What's the way out of this vicious cycle?

>Small Rockets does this pretty well, for instance. No pretention at all on
>their pages. I quite like "Star Monkey" (It's just a shooter).

Funny, I've only vaguely heard of this title. Will take a closer look, as
I've much enjoyed indy space titles like Star Wolves & Nexus. Cheers mate!

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
1/5/2008 12:50:11 AM
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:50:11 +1100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Nostromo
wrote: 

>What's the way out of this vicious cycle?

Believe it or not, I'm pretty sure it starts with the audience. We find our own
way out. There will always be someone putting out something cool.

It doesn't really matter to me whether it comes from a big publisher or an
independent.

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/5/2008 1:34:39 AM
Justisaur wrote:

> 
> Yep.  Too easy to get hold of the answers these days.  I think that's
> what really killed adventure games, and to a lesser extent certain
> RPGs with puzzle elements.  I never liked being stuck very long.
> Portal was ridiculously easy by the old standards, but yet I was still
> tempted to go to the web.  I managed to get through it without doing
> so, and I'm proud of myself for having done so, but now I'm stuck on
> the last advanced room, and I haven't a clue.  And all I have is my
> pride.


I asked a question yesterday about COD4 on veteran difficulty in csipga. 
  This is (obviously) not a brain teaser just a frustrating part that 
I've tried a few times and now just want to get past.

The point is that no-one has yet shouted 'Google' which is good because 
I hate walkthroughs.  Not because I don't occasionally need them but 
because you can't look at *just* the bit you need.  You have to scan for 
that bit seeing spoilers or being tempted to look past that bit.  That 
hurts 'my' pride.

Like you I don't 'want' help so if I'm really, really stuck I'd rather 
ask folk in here.  In return I'm generally given tips such as 'have you 
looked up?' or 'look around some more'.  It's rare you'll get someone 
tell you blow for blow how to do something.  I see that as one of the 
reasons for the existence of gaming NG's.

(And I've asked about some of the advanced puzzles in Portal too)


0
Shawk
1/5/2008 4:38:16 AM
"Magnate" <contact.me@some.other.way> writes:

> "Gerry Quinn" <gerryq@indigo.ie> wrote in message 
> news:MPG.21e859ec46362b8498bea2@news1.eircom.net...
>> In article <e7j155-4p4.ln1@baba.sadnet>, contact.me@some.other.way
>> says...
>>
>>> Another great essay Zag - thanks for that. What intrigues me about this 
>>> is
>>> that they're trying to compete in a system which is biased against them
>>> (because they lack the big marketing dollars, as mcv said in another 
>>> post).
>>> Instead of trying to compete using cool B/W photos and image, IMO they
>>> should try to change the system. That means coming up with a new
>>> payment/distribution model to bypass the major studios.
>>
>> Payment and distribution systems are pretty trivial.  The hard part is
>> marketing.
>
> I disagree. Marketing is easy - especially on the net - once you have a 
> winning formula

Of course it is easy "when you have a winning formula". This means you
have already successfully marketed it/ have a winning marketing
formula. Getting that winning formula is far from easy. Certainly the
email channel is a waste of time - does anyone (gamer) read unsolicited
email anymore? I know I don't.
0
Walter
1/5/2008 4:56:21 PM
On Jan 3, 4:01=A0am, riku <r...@none.invalid.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:43:29 +0000, Andrew <spamt...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:31:57 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
> ><meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>For the time, these games were great. Lots of great stories, lots of
> >>humor, decent action, great graphcis (again, for the time) , great
> >>immersion... just tons of FUN.
>
> >>What the heck happened!?
>
> >A lot of the fun games these days are on consoles, PC gaming is
> >becoming way too serious.
>
> I don't know about that. I bought Psychonauts (for PS2; I know there
> is also a PC version but I played safe because I am not sure about the
> PC HW requirements) because I seem to recall reading it is made by the
> same people as Grim Fandango or some other PC game I used to like a
> lot, even if it is more of an action game.
>
> So far, I'm completely unimpressed. Grim Fandango blew me away with
> its premise. Psychonauts, OTOH, just feels stupid, and seems to be
> aimed at much younger audience than what Grim Fandango was. That is
> the impression I get with most games (console vs PC). PC games can
> still be tongue in the cheek, even if they are not made for kids. Jak
> & Daxter and Ratchet & Clank seem like respectable 3D platform games,
> but the humor and premise in them seems to appeal more to my kids than
> me.

I think it depends on what games you play.  I tend to drift towards
the JRPGs as opposed to the action RPGs, and most of those don't seem
to be aimed at THAT young an audience (unless I'm really just young at
heart [grin]).

> >As a multiplatform gamer 2007 was probably the best year ever for me
> >in nearly 30 years of gaming, but aside from Portal, all of the best
> >moments were not on PC.
>
> So what were your bright and shining moments on consoles last year? I
> promise not to criticize your picks out loud, just want to check if
> there really is anything in which I also might be interested.

I'm not sure if you got an answer to this (if you did, I'd be
interested in it as well to see what console games I might want to
play [grin]) but for me, in a year where gaming got kind of shelved,
Persona 3 on the PS2 was one of the most frustrating greatest games
I've ever played.  The fact that I can SEE where it was flawed and
still utterly enjoyed the story and characterizations is really quite
amazing.
0
Allan
1/7/2008 1:32:54 PM
In article <3u4255-gv8.ln1@baba.sadnet>, contact.me@some.other.way 
says...
> "Gerry Quinn" <gerryq@indigo.ie> wrote in message 
> news:MPG.21e859ec46362b8498bea2@news1.eircom.net...
> > In article <e7j155-4p4.ln1@baba.sadnet>, contact.me@some.other.way
> > says...
> >
> >> Another great essay Zag - thanks for that. What intrigues me about this 
> >> is
> >> that they're trying to compete in a system which is biased against them
> >> (because they lack the big marketing dollars, as mcv said in another 
> >> post).
> >> Instead of trying to compete using cool B/W photos and image, IMO they
> >> should try to change the system. That means coming up with a new
> >> payment/distribution model to bypass the major studios.
> >
> > Payment and distribution systems are pretty trivial.  The hard part is
> > marketing.
> 
> I disagree. Marketing is easy - especially on the net - once you have a 
> winning formula (product plus payment model). People will do it for you.

Like I said - product and payment model are *completely trivial* 
nowadays.  You make the product, and you can organise a website and a 
payment system off the shelf for very small cost.

Then you can sit and wait because there are a zillion other good 
products out there and people talk about them too, and yours is totally 
lost in the crowd.  

Sure, one time in a million you could be lucky and your product will 
start a craze - but other products as good will languish in obscurity 
forever without marketing.

- Gerry Quinn






0
Gerry
1/7/2008 3:06:10 PM
Magnate wrote:
>Give Angband a proper try - I'd be very surprised if you weren't 
>hooked by 
>it.

Have you tried Dwarf Fortress? (To drag back on topic, it's not 
properly an RPG, but some people use it as a frame for storytelling -- 
searh for "Boatmurdered" for an example, or check the forums.)

http://www.bay12games/dwarves/

  K.
-- 


0
K
1/7/2008 3:55:46 PM
On Jan 2, 3:43 pm, Andrew <spamt...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> As a multiplatform gamer 2007 was probably the best year ever for me
> in nearly 30 years of gaming, but aside fromPortal, all of the best
> moments were not on PC.

Portal was multi-platform as it was released in the Orange Box on
XBox360 as well as on the PC.

BTW, Portal is great!  Fun puzzles and laugh out loud humor.  The
singing credits had my whole family laughing so loud I had to replay
the ending again so everyone could hear.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSU4i2uapis
0
WDS
1/8/2008 4:40:18 PM
I guess I mostly miss those Adventure games like Monkey Island..  I
mean come on! A Spitting Contest mini game! How brilliant!

I would really like to see FPS games bring back this type of "point
and click" puzzle solving. The only useful items in FPS games are
health, weapons and ammo. All the modelling and interaction with
doors, cabinets is all just to hide health and weapons.

It would be nice if in future version of FPS games you found actual
items that you needed to pickup to solve puzzles.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was fun.. but when you opened lockers or searched for
stuff it was all equipment/ammo/health related.

These FPS games really, IMO, need to take the environment interaction
to the next level. They should have more things like paintings on
walls that have safes behind them you have to unlock (instead of just
showing the safe, like in Bioshock).

Books with passages and codes, and just all kinds of 3D items needed
to solve puzzles, whether they were 3D puzzles or not.

Enough with going around and just killing everything and picking up
ammo/health.
0
Psalm
1/8/2008 6:20:49 PM
In article <76deac61-c85f-4e73-853e-b4d78a75ab9c@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
Psalm Nuclei  <meatnub@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>These FPS games really, IMO, need to take the environment interaction
>to the next level. They should have more things like paintings on
>walls that have safes behind them you have to unlock (instead of just
>showing the safe, like in Bioshock).

Isn't this a concept that was explored in Oblivion? For specific objects, 
you could actually reach in with the mouse and move items around. Granted, 
there were really no puzzles or problems that depended on this capability, 
but the potential was certainly there. I really wish that Sega's FREE 
exploration engine had been ported to PC, since the games that used that 
had exactly the sort of interaction you're describing (moving the painting 
to find the hidden latch that opens the door.) Granted, it was all 
single-button context-sensitive interaction, but it's as close to VR as 
we'll get without a different UI.

-KKC, who notes that the most creative environment interaction in Oblivion 
always seems to involve stacking and posing the corpses of your defeated 
enemies...
-- 
-- Universal survival rule #109 - Chicken nuggets must be served -- kendrick
in a quantity that is also a prime number. Failure to do so will -- @io.com
result in a geometric disturbance conducive to the resurrection of Cthulhu. 
Disregard this rule if the meat in the nuggets is not actually chicken.
0
Kendrick
1/8/2008 6:37:34 PM
On Jan 8, 12:20 pm, Psalm Nuclei <meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would really like to see FPS games bring back this type of "point
> and click" puzzle solving. The only useful items in FPS games are
> health, weapons and ammo. All the modelling and interaction with
> doors, cabinets is all just to hide health and weapons.
>
> It would be nice if in future version of FPS games you found actual
> items that you needed to pickup to solve puzzles.

Having just played it Half Life had (has) some of this.  But if you
put too much puzzle related stuff in a (non-puzzle) game then some
subset of the audience will howl that it is no longer a "pure" FPS/RPG/
whatever.  Ever hear of Puzzle Quest?  It's an RPG whose combat system
is a puzzle game.  Some of our very own regulars here deny it is an
RPG.
0
WDS
1/8/2008 7:45:57 PM
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:28:11 -0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Gerry Quinn
wrote: 

>In article <4qion3t32n20r608e7em2fsnhdrm2utu53@4ax.com>, 
>zaghadka@hotmail.com says...
>> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 
>> >You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
>> >buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
>> >never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
>> >so often.
>> >
>> >http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
>> 
>> Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
>> clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
>> though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
>> bank account.
>
>Darwinia didn't work for me either.  I like Spiderweb, I think they do 
>it right in terms of balance which is a very difficult thing.  Some 
>recent games have gained a clunkiness feature which I hope they lose - 
>I think they were trying to simplify the interface and went too far.  A 
>minor thing though.  Spiderweb are still kings of the indie CRPG, 
>unless you can't handle the retro graphics.
>
>The indies can find their way onto the market too, either independently 
>or via Real Networks or other publishers.  I think the recent indie 
>game I most played to death was Oasis (Civ crossed with Minesweeper).  
>This thread encouraged me to try 'Democracy', which seems complicated 
>but interesting.  In RPG/Strategy I think Depths of Peril shows promise 
>but I haven't time to get into it.
> 
>> I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)
>
>Bah, Crawl is the greatest of the modern roguelikes!  I've gone off it 
>now, though, but I played a good bit last year.
>
>I actually wrote a little roguelike last year, if anyone's interested 
>to try it.  Be warned, it's designed to be a hard and tactical one, and 
>there are some unusual features (no natural health or mana 
>regeneration, no experience from killing monsters).  It's perfectly 
>winnable with any class though.
>
> <http://indigo.ie/~gerryq/lair/lair.htm>
>
>Needs Windows and mouse control.
>
I somehow missed your reply for quite a bit, but found it now. Thanks for all
the great tips and info.

I'll be trying out your game in a little while.

Cheers.

-- 
Zag

That's nonsense; if words are a comment on a particular piece of text, 
they may not have any particular meaning on their own.
0
Zaghadka
1/8/2008 7:50:55 PM
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 08:40:18 -0800 (PST), WDS <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:

>> As a multiplatform gamer 2007 was probably the best year ever for me
>> in nearly 30 years of gaming, but aside fromPortal, all of the best
>> moments were not on PC.
>
>Portal was multi-platform as it was released in the Orange Box on
>XBox360 as well as on the PC.

....and PS3, I just happened to play it on PC.
-- 
Andrew, contact via http://interpleb.googlepages.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
0
Andrew
1/9/2008 7:43:12 AM
In article <kuk7o3pb11ve2g6m8dqc005vv5psgh7nha@4ax.com>, 
zaghadka@hotmail.com says...
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:28:11 -0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Gerry Quinn
> wrote: 
> 
> >In article <4qion3t32n20r608e7em2fsnhdrm2utu53@4ax.com>, 
> >zaghadka@hotmail.com says...
> >> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:31:25 +0000, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Shawk wrote: 
> >> >You all seem to be ignoring Indie games where daring still seems to be a 
> >> >buzz-word.  Some great titles out there and a lot of it is free.  I'll 
> >> >never uninstall Darwinia for example - still love dipping into it every 
> >> >so often.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.tigsource.com/features/spirit.html
> >> 
> >> Yup. That is the great white hope of PC gaming for me. Spiderweb's stuff seems
> >> clunky. Basilisk's is crap. Introversion's Darwinia didn't do much for me,
> >> though Upload was a lot of fun. At least until I figured out how to rob a large
> >> bank account.
> >
> >Darwinia didn't work for me either.  I like Spiderweb, I think they do 
> >it right in terms of balance which is a very difficult thing.  Some 
> >recent games have gained a clunkiness feature which I hope they lose - 
> >I think they were trying to simplify the interface and went too far.  A 
> >minor thing though.  Spiderweb are still kings of the indie CRPG, 
> >unless you can't handle the retro graphics.
> >
> >The indies can find their way onto the market too, either independently 
> >or via Real Networks or other publishers.  I think the recent indie 
> >game I most played to death was Oasis (Civ crossed with Minesweeper).  
> >This thread encouraged me to try 'Democracy', which seems complicated 
> >but interesting.  In RPG/Strategy I think Depths of Peril shows promise 
> >but I haven't time to get into it.
> > 
> >> I've been playing more Nethack than ever. Freeware rules! ;^)
> >
> >Bah, Crawl is the greatest of the modern roguelikes!  I've gone off it 
> >now, though, but I played a good bit last year.
> >
> >I actually wrote a little roguelike last year, if anyone's interested 
> >to try it.  Be warned, it's designed to be a hard and tactical one, and 
> >there are some unusual features (no natural health or mana 
> >regeneration, no experience from killing monsters).  It's perfectly 
> >winnable with any class though.
> >
> > <http://indigo.ie/~gerryq/lair/lair.htm>
> >
> >Needs Windows and mouse control.
> >
> I somehow missed your reply for quite a bit, but found it now. Thanks for all
> the great tips and info.
> 
> I'll be trying out your game in a little while.

Well, it's not the greatest of roguelikes, but it's in the 'Coffee 
Break' category - short, with nothing much to learn or remember.

- Gerry Quinn
0
Gerry
1/9/2008 2:25:43 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Need advise on specs on highend 1990's pc that can play 80/90's games
Hi, Figured this may be a good group for this question since action gamers are more into hardware than most other genre. If Im wrong, sorry. Anyway I been getting nostalgic lately over the old games I can no longer play on my AMD 2400+, Radeon 9700pro, Audigy 2, Win XPpro system. Most of the time the video or sound doesn't work right. I want to find an old pc that will run all of the games from the 90's and early 80's if possible. However Im forget what specs I would need. Processor? Memory? Sound Blaster? video card? Maybe a 2D card (which one?) and Voodoo 3DFX card etc etc et...

PC Gaming Almost Dead -AGAIN- So................ PC Industry Consortium to announce 'PC Gaming Alliance' to save PC gaming
Takahashi: Gaming Alliance stumps for PC By Dean Takahashi Mercury News 02/12/2008 The personal computer game industry has trailed behind its console brethren in recent years as easy-to-play games on the Nintendo Wii or online games on the Xbox 360 have stolen the excitement. Companies with a vested interest in keeping the PC alive as a gaming platform will soon announce a consortium dubbed the PC Gaming Alliance. According to two people familiar with the effort, it will include top industry players such as Intel, Microsoft, Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices as well as a number of computer ...

90's Game -- Spielberg's "Director's Chair"
This seems like a long shot (get it...long shot?) but is anybody reading this group familiar with a game called Steven Spielberg's Director's Chair from the mid-nineties? Actually, it's more of a movie- studio familiarizer than a game, per se, but it does have its strong points in terms of recreating a certain, Hollywood-y atmosphere. I'm curious because, when I run this program on a Windows 2000 box, I keep hitting an "Internal Error" during my first dip in The Lab. I can hear the first line of dialogue repeat about three times, then it shuts me down. Becau...

Are today's Adventure Games any different from the 90's Adventure Games?
Hi Everyone, It's been a long time since I posted on this newsgroup. Are today's Adventu= re Games any different from the Adventure Games in the Nineties? I have loo= ked at reviews on Adventure Gamers about new Adventure Games. It appears to= me that Adventure Games are no different today than they were 20 years ago= .. It's look like L.A Noire is well worth to buy. With L.A Noire, is the puz= zle design different from the old Sierra and LucasArts?=20 Robert Here, Robert Perrett <rtperrett@gmail.com> wrote: > It's been a long time since I posted on t...

It's on-it's off-it's on, it's off -WHY?
IS THIS THE CORRECT FORUM? Hope so. We have three computer networked at home...all with Windows XP. one of those is a laptop. Some mornings all 3 can see each other and transfer files...then mysteriously one or more will disappear. No contact....then later it's back. The laptop is the worst. Most often it won't let us in...but sometimes it will. No obvious reason. The most INFURIATING part is the message "see your administrator". Dammit Bill Gates...don't you realize that most networks are small offices without a Majestic Royal Administrator sitting his i...

FA: 3 PC GAMES - SPYCRAFT, POLICE QUEST, KING'S QUEST
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5765197226 ...

FA: 3 PC GAMES - SPYCRAFT, POLICE QUEST, KING'S QUEST
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5765197226 ...

New PC
Hello again, I want to buy a new PC with a Core 2 Quad Processor and 4 Gig of Ram as this is optimal for using Maxwell Render. I had a look at the Dell Precisions which are very expensive and then I found this gaming PC which costs much less for a high spec. Can anyone see a problem with using this with Solidworks (i.e. the graphics card etc)? http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=uk&cs=ukbsdt1&kc=305&l=en&oc=D02XP3B&s=bsd&sbc=xpsdt_710h2c "will" <will_usher@yahoo.co.uk> skrev i en meddelelse news:1170540561.427467.148860@q2g2000cwa...

SEGA's NextGen game: 'CONDEMNED'
http://img142.exs.cx/img142/8510/migmini3ez.jpg All the info is in the new Game Informer which I suppose noone has yet, seem like survival horror game for Playstation3, Xbox2 and PC quote: " ...this month we bring you a world exclusive look at Sega's upcoming next-generation take on the horror genre, Condemned. And while the game is sporting some seriously impressive visuals, it also has some other tricks up its sleeves that will terrify the heck out of you. " also, interestingly, ____________________________________________________________________________ _ quote: "...

[News] Microsoft's Game to Lose and Microsoft's Game to Cheat
Microsoft's Game to Lose ,----[ Quote ] | If Vista, over time, fails to meet the market's high expectations, | a good chunk of last year's gains could evaporate. In other words, | Vista is now Microsoft's game to lose. `---- http://online.barrons.com/public/article/SB117046721421997023-6z_ntXi4h4DtYvtFZCp1yIPyOOU_20070305.html?mod=mktw http://tinyurl.com/2n3otv Contra-indications for Ecma 376 spec, still not rebutted ,----[ Quote ] | Ecma 376 is known by various other names including DOCX, MOOX, OOXML, | EOOXML and MS Office Open XML. The profusion of alternate namings make...

FA: C64 Gettysburg SSI Game & 4 IBM PC Games(civil war) / 8 IBM PC Game Games
> Item name: SIX Western Digital 6.4gb Hard Drives > Price: $46.00 > Buy It Now: $46.00 > Bids: -- http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3482211928 > Item name: 8 IBM PC Game Games - (Pirates , Paperboy) > Price: $9.99 > Bids: 1 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8107002333 > Item name: C64 Gettysburg SSI Game & 4 IBM PC Games(civil war) > Price: $9.99 > Bids: ...

How can I network 3 Windows PC's and 2 Linux PC's?
I have three Winodws running PC's(Win 2K, XP), I downloaded lot of freely available programs (anti-virus and some other installable programs) and stored on one PC. I want to install the same programs on other Windows PC's, How can I access it. All are on the local LAN. I can ping each PC from any of the machine. The same way can I access the files on my Wiondows PC from Linux PC and viceversa?. How can I do that?. Please let me know. If I access my PC where I stored all of my programs from another PC, it will be very quick to install. Also I need to access some files across PC&...

It's true: IBM's PC business bought by Lenovo.
Hey Everyone: Well, it happened: http://news.com.com/IBM+sells+PC+group+to+Lenovo/2100-1042_3-5482284.html?tag=st_lh http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/08/0314207&tid=136&tid=187&tid=98&tid=1 IBM's PC business has been bought out by Lenovo of China for $1.25 billion USD (Lenovo is also taking on IBM's debt). IBM is getting a 18.9% stake in Lenovo, and Lenovo gets to use the IBM and Think names for the next five years. Only time will tell what this means for OS/2 users. IBM could in theory continue to sell PCs under its brand name that...

Selling:Serious Sam 2 (PC),Cabela's Big Game Hunter 2K6 (PC), Half Life 2 (PC)
Selling: *Fear:Director�s Cut Edition (PC-DVD) *Myst 5 End of Ages Limited Edition (PC)(PC-DVD) *Call of Duty 2 (PC) *Serious Sam 2 (PC) *Cabela�s Big Game Hunter 2006 (PC) *Half Life 2 (PC) �all DVDs,CDs and all materials in boxes are as they came originally:mint. Opened boxes,but everything that was in the game boxes is there now,everything in new-condition,CDs/DVDs are flawless��no scratches on CDs or DVDs whatsoever. Fear is brand new,and probably the most original FPS ever. VERY scary game. Director�s Edition includes comic book and extra DVDs with extra content and com...

Web resources about - I miss the 80's/early 90's PC/C64 games - comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg

Resources last updated: 2/9/2016 10:29:05 AM