Am I the only one who thinks that a 3D type engine would ruin the main theme of DM? It was made to be played in the original type dungeon and possible variations (i.e. Drake's clone). I think something like Quake or Half-life wouldn't improve things, it would be like a new game rather than an extension to the original DM. I think the only variations should be close to the original dungeon so it is still recognisable as DM.
Also, I will add a DM Clones forum when I get a minute.
IAN
Pulp give the British music industry a brighter future. This is the way they say the future's meant to feel.
3D??
Forum rules
Please read the Forum rules and policies before posting.
Please read the Forum rules and policies before posting.
One thing to say
The thing about Half Life Quake and unreal is that it wouldnt realy be a Mod it would be a new game created with a different style of programming language but thr main core of the program will be run in a C+ type language i will send you some source code that i am developing for a Screamer in unreal at the moment it looks very much like a C code the only thing that is created with UnrealED(the Unreal engine editor) is the level design the rest is created with Paint Shop Pro and Truespace The Sound FX maybe (i might take the graphics out of Dungeon Master)I was also thinking of Ripping Out of dungeon master but it probably endanger Copoyright issues so i will probaly have to create
them to , so at the end of the day it`s not just as simple as it looks to create games with other engine
The Black Knight
P.S. if you want to see some screenshots (only 1 so far) goto
<a href="http://communities.msn.com/TheImperialL ... Dungeon</a>
them to , so at the end of the day it`s not just as simple as it looks to create games with other engine
The Black Knight
P.S. if you want to see some screenshots (only 1 so far) goto
<a href="http://communities.msn.com/TheImperialL ... Dungeon</a>
-
cowsmanaut
- Moo Master
- Posts: 4378
- Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:53 am
- Location: canada
DM 3D
I would first like to point out that it's not really my clone. It's george's clone I'm just doing graphics for it.
3D would not destroy the feel of DM at all. However one must recognize where the differences between quake and DM *REALLY* lay.
The most important does not lay with the engine .. not exactly.. It has more to do with the interaction with that world. you have a number of creatures that you hold little respect for since they're not that tough and you have a full clip on your BFG. 1 purple worm would have me fighting for my life and I had 4 characters. There was character to all the creatures and even to the dungeon.. Chaos was always laughing from the background.. you knew this as soon as that first trick "this wall says nothing"
the need to practice skills and learn spells. This gave an importance to a particular character.. each one unique in it's own rigt and more so the more you used them. you Gothmog wouldn't be the same as someone elses.. simple because you took time and care to train him and mold him into something more. To say I'ma mon level fighter means more than saying I found the grenade launcher on level 4.
There was no need for hordes of creatures to chase you down just to get you scared.. there was a great desire to search every last inch of every wall lest you miss some small detail.. puzzles actualy tested your mind not you hard eye coordination.
If you notice how less popular DM2 is? think about it a moment. doesn't it seem a little more like doom and quake in some ways? masses of monsters that won't let you rest.. tests of speed and coordination rather than wit.. is it any wonder it fell short?
Sure both quake and DM have secret doors and puzzles but it's how they present them and how they work that difffers and that's the biggest point. and what's mine?
My point is, if you work around the way DM works you can do it in 3D and make it feel much the same. Or you can go with the same old mindless carnage and the brainless bashing of the space bar looking for that secret door...
Drake
3D would not destroy the feel of DM at all. However one must recognize where the differences between quake and DM *REALLY* lay.
The most important does not lay with the engine .. not exactly.. It has more to do with the interaction with that world. you have a number of creatures that you hold little respect for since they're not that tough and you have a full clip on your BFG. 1 purple worm would have me fighting for my life and I had 4 characters. There was character to all the creatures and even to the dungeon.. Chaos was always laughing from the background.. you knew this as soon as that first trick "this wall says nothing"
the need to practice skills and learn spells. This gave an importance to a particular character.. each one unique in it's own rigt and more so the more you used them. you Gothmog wouldn't be the same as someone elses.. simple because you took time and care to train him and mold him into something more. To say I'ma mon level fighter means more than saying I found the grenade launcher on level 4.
There was no need for hordes of creatures to chase you down just to get you scared.. there was a great desire to search every last inch of every wall lest you miss some small detail.. puzzles actualy tested your mind not you hard eye coordination.
If you notice how less popular DM2 is? think about it a moment. doesn't it seem a little more like doom and quake in some ways? masses of monsters that won't let you rest.. tests of speed and coordination rather than wit.. is it any wonder it fell short?
Sure both quake and DM have secret doors and puzzles but it's how they present them and how they work that difffers and that's the biggest point. and what's mine?
My point is, if you work around the way DM works you can do it in 3D and make it feel much the same. Or you can go with the same old mindless carnage and the brainless bashing of the space bar looking for that secret door...
Drake
I aggree
I agree George if You follow The screen shot on the Forum it may look like a true 3D view but all i have done is place a 360 panning view into the game i may remove the new Dungeon Graphics and replace them with the old infact i am 99% sure i will do that i will copy most of the DM interface and display it as The HUD the screen shot on the main page hasn`t got the updated graphics but it will do soon, and yes it will have the Magic Symbols Option
to be 3ded or not
I payed lot of attention, wether or not the use of an 3d engine will ruin the Dm feeling.
And my answer is definitely no.
Dungeon Master, and such game as Bard's tale, and so on have been created in a period the true 3d did not exist yet, and DM somehow has emulated 3d with bitmap.
now that the 3d engines are very powerful, it is the moment to realise that the DM suits perfectly in a 3d environment because DM intend to create a 3d game, before implementation of 3d, DM has been developed to be a 3d game
Now that the technology is available, we have to create a 3d engine that at last will power up the original game,
the only thing we have to care of, is to respect to feeling of the original game
And my answer is definitely no.
Dungeon Master, and such game as Bard's tale, and so on have been created in a period the true 3d did not exist yet, and DM somehow has emulated 3d with bitmap.
now that the 3d engines are very powerful, it is the moment to realise that the DM suits perfectly in a 3d environment because DM intend to create a 3d game, before implementation of 3d, DM has been developed to be a 3d game
Now that the technology is available, we have to create a 3d engine that at last will power up the original game,
the only thing we have to care of, is to respect to feeling of the original game
I agree with 3D
I think freedom of movement can only enhance DM if done right. Also imagine an 'improved' DM with more freedom of movement for character and monster fights...having to dart around and intelligently block and attack creatures rather than the 'standing fights' in the original.
Was unable to (permenantly) kill off ian_scho (Haynuus), Ameena, oh_brother (Westian), money (Falkor), raixel (Petal) and Lord_Bones (Aurek) in the DM D&D game Time's Champions!
CONGRATULATIONS TO THOSE WHO MADE THE GAME WHAT IT WAS - GREAT!
CONGRATULATIONS TO THOSE WHO MADE THE GAME WHAT IT WAS - GREAT!
3d?
my gripe aobut 3d is that the game itself was perfect without it and future versions can be as well.
if you make it 3d you have to change everything drasticly like moving up and down... is there jumping? ducking? did that fireball hit it? can you jump on that box? what are the dimensions of chests? if placed on top of that... can the monster hit you if your on top of something? can thry get up there too?
it seems alot easier and better to update the old and enhance it then to go 3d. be able to add more items, spells, character's, ect.
if you make it 3d you have to change everything drasticly like moving up and down... is there jumping? ducking? did that fireball hit it? can you jump on that box? what are the dimensions of chests? if placed on top of that... can the monster hit you if your on top of something? can thry get up there too?
it seems alot easier and better to update the old and enhance it then to go 3d. be able to add more items, spells, character's, ect.
Re: 3d?
And don't forget that if you use 3D, you could'nt
make the infinite corridor, (remembers this corridors
you have needed a compass to know when the polarities
have been inversed). It could'nt be possible to make
such a thing with 3D, because when you'll be reversed
you could see the smooth movement...
There's also the teleportation effect that could'nt
be like in original DM.
Think of it
Enzo from <a href="http://enzofr.free.fr">enzofr.free.fr</a>
make the infinite corridor, (remembers this corridors
you have needed a compass to know when the polarities
have been inversed). It could'nt be possible to make
such a thing with 3D, because when you'll be reversed
you could see the smooth movement...
There's also the teleportation effect that could'nt
be like in original DM.
Think of it
Enzo from <a href="http://enzofr.free.fr">enzofr.free.fr</a>
Nope on 3D
Mainly for a simple, practical reason: it's a hell of a lot harder to program than a simple 2d engine. There are many professional games out there with half-baked 3d engines that look rather ugly. Can amatuers hope to do much better?
Meanwhile, RTC has already sucessfully implemented a 2d engine. Designing a 3d one is time consuming and pushes the project closer to vaporware.
Anyway, it isn't much different from the current games avaliable. The issue of whether or not free movement is an improvement isn't so relavent: rather, the issue is that free movement wouldn't be Dungeon Master. It would be Ultima Underworld or Daggerfall. Now if you guys were making an Underworld or Daggerfall clone, that's all good, but what defined DM and its clones was the restriction of movement.
This doesen't mean you couldn't change things a little: perhaps making grids smaller, maybe a 6x6 view instead of 3x3; maybe even something as radical as diagonal movement. But it can be changed only a little. The tile-based restrictive movement is critical to many defining tactics and gameplay that makes DM what it is.
Because restriction of movement is important, a true 3d engine would just be window dressing. While graphics do have an important place, if you end up spending more time on your graphics engine than other aspects, the project probably won't reach fruition.
Another option is a more advanced 2d engine such as the one in Lands of Lore. This uses bitmap scaling to make monsters smoothly approach and retreat from the player, as well as smooth transitions with walls when walking forward or backward. Someone has already developed a panoramic view that could be used for smooth turning. I don't know if this is much easier to do than a full 3d engine: if not, then stick with the 2d, but this is an option to consider.
Meanwhile, RTC has already sucessfully implemented a 2d engine. Designing a 3d one is time consuming and pushes the project closer to vaporware.
Anyway, it isn't much different from the current games avaliable. The issue of whether or not free movement is an improvement isn't so relavent: rather, the issue is that free movement wouldn't be Dungeon Master. It would be Ultima Underworld or Daggerfall. Now if you guys were making an Underworld or Daggerfall clone, that's all good, but what defined DM and its clones was the restriction of movement.
This doesen't mean you couldn't change things a little: perhaps making grids smaller, maybe a 6x6 view instead of 3x3; maybe even something as radical as diagonal movement. But it can be changed only a little. The tile-based restrictive movement is critical to many defining tactics and gameplay that makes DM what it is.
Because restriction of movement is important, a true 3d engine would just be window dressing. While graphics do have an important place, if you end up spending more time on your graphics engine than other aspects, the project probably won't reach fruition.
Another option is a more advanced 2d engine such as the one in Lands of Lore. This uses bitmap scaling to make monsters smoothly approach and retreat from the player, as well as smooth transitions with walls when walking forward or backward. Someone has already developed a panoramic view that could be used for smooth turning. I don't know if this is much easier to do than a full 3d engine: if not, then stick with the 2d, but this is an option to consider.
-
Guest
against 3D
im against 3D, the reasons have been named before. you dont need 3D in an angled dungeon anyway (look at ultima underworld, its ONLY confusing and good for nothing).
what would be speaking for 3D is that one could hide buttons at the floor or the ceiling (and thats something im against, too
)
what would be speaking for 3D is that one could hide buttons at the floor or the ceiling (and thats something im against, too
)-
Lubor Kolar
- Artisan
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2001 10:21 pm
- Location: Prague, Czech Republic, Europe
I would like 3D engine
but as someone wrote, with movement restricted to step-like (as in original DM).
I think it would bring these plusses:
* 3D accelerator support for special visual effect instead of making all visual effects only with main CPU (look at (BTW very good) RTC, how it is time and power compsumting because of processing 24bit graphics)
* true lighing/shading effects (try to imagine dark corridor with a little light ahead where torch is in the wall holder...)
* smooth monster movement/attacks animations
* if someone wants to (and I really don't), switching to full-3D mode could be really easy implemented (it just want to implement both movement/attack modes)
Minuses I see:
* graphics must be remaked and 3D objects should be created
* the old good DM graphics will be no more since it would look different if rendered in 3D
I hope I will get some time and when (if sometimes...) George releases RTC sources I will help with making 3D version, but since I am a programmer and not artist I would need a lot of help...
I think it would bring these plusses:
* 3D accelerator support for special visual effect instead of making all visual effects only with main CPU (look at (BTW very good) RTC, how it is time and power compsumting because of processing 24bit graphics)
* true lighing/shading effects (try to imagine dark corridor with a little light ahead where torch is in the wall holder...)
* smooth monster movement/attacks animations
* if someone wants to (and I really don't), switching to full-3D mode could be really easy implemented (it just want to implement both movement/attack modes)
Minuses I see:
* graphics must be remaked and 3D objects should be created
* the old good DM graphics will be no more since it would look different if rendered in 3D
I hope I will get some time and when (if sometimes...) George releases RTC sources I will help with making 3D version, but since I am a programmer and not artist I would need a lot of help...
-
Gambit37
- Should eat more pies
- Posts: 13720
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
- Location: Location, Location
- Contact:
Re: I would like 3D engine
I very much doubt that George will ever release the source code for RTC, so don't hold your breath!
He has already discussed this several times, and has made his original intent clear: that RTC was intended as a project for him to learn how to program a game, and to extend the possibilities of DM. If others benefit from that, then it's a bonus.
Why would someone spend months developing something that's so personal, only to give it away as soon as it's finished? I know I certainly wouldn't. And even if he chose to, it wouldn't help anyone write a three dimensional version as most of the code would need to change anyway. RTC is not a 3D engine - it just draws 2D bitmaps direct to screen to simulate a 3D environment, the same way the original DM did.
He has already discussed this several times, and has made his original intent clear: that RTC was intended as a project for him to learn how to program a game, and to extend the possibilities of DM. If others benefit from that, then it's a bonus.
Why would someone spend months developing something that's so personal, only to give it away as soon as it's finished? I know I certainly wouldn't. And even if he chose to, it wouldn't help anyone write a three dimensional version as most of the code would need to change anyway. RTC is not a 3D engine - it just draws 2D bitmaps direct to screen to simulate a 3D environment, the same way the original DM did.
-
Lubor Kolar
- Artisan
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2001 10:21 pm
- Location: Prague, Czech Republic, Europe
Re: I would like 3D engine
Huh, seems like chat
You have asked, why should George release his personal project. I will ask the different way: why not if it could help someone? It is only up to George if he decides to release or not.
And about coding: I think only rendering subsystem should be *completely* rewritten, because spells, monster behaviour, inventory management etc. could be original (of course with minor modifications).
My vision is that when RTC calls function like RedrawDisplay(), function RedrawDisplay() will be compeletely new and will draw scene in true 3D according to actual situation in dungeon (light, monsters, objects etc.). I am sure there will be a lot of work to do that, but I think RTC sources would help a lot. Of course we can start from empty field...
I think we will see in several months
You have asked, why should George release his personal project. I will ask the different way: why not if it could help someone? It is only up to George if he decides to release or not.
And about coding: I think only rendering subsystem should be *completely* rewritten, because spells, monster behaviour, inventory management etc. could be original (of course with minor modifications).
My vision is that when RTC calls function like RedrawDisplay(), function RedrawDisplay() will be compeletely new and will draw scene in true 3D according to actual situation in dungeon (light, monsters, objects etc.). I am sure there will be a lot of work to do that, but I think RTC sources would help a lot. Of course we can start from empty field...
I think we will see in several months