what does everyone *REALLY* want?

[cowsmanaut]

I know that most want to be able to create CSB for the sake of playing it through on PC since it isn't available for PC.

There are those who just want to make DM maps with a few more options but nothing major..

And then.. there are those who want something far more and far different. A game creation kit.. dungeons, sounds, graphics, music, spells, skills and abilities, monsters, items, intros and endings, and quest goals! In short.. the ability to make a firstperson game with out having to program it themselves.

If you want full customizablity.. then why reffer to it as a DM clone?? It won't be that anymore. It will be something completly new everytime someone makes a new pack for it.

*If* this is really what people want, and in all honesty I think really it is.. I think that should George agree to this sort of thing it should be renamed to be apropriate to it's purpose and RTC should be apart from it. This way it George could then get money for all of his hard work, as he deserves no doubt, and not worry about copyright.

I am guilty of getting away from the whole DM deal myself.. I would like an advanced DM really. I think that there are something that shouldn't be touched and others that should be 'fixed'. However some of you need to be honest and state what your ultimate desire is. These suggestions go far beyond (some fo them anyway) what would make a DM game.. they are instead only defining a 'First Person Fantasy Advernture RPG'

I don't know how you feel about this George but I would really like to hear what your feeling are on this issue? How far would you be willing to go with this project? What do you want out of this venture since you are doing nearly all of the work. All we are doing is play testing and offering suggestions and fixes..

I think this is a really good topic to discuss and I'd like to see what people have to say about it..

[George Gilbert]

In my opinion this is two seperate issues - firstly what is RTC, and secondly what can be done.

RTC is not, and will not be, a perfect DM clone. It is however intended to be indistinguishable from DM for someone who hasn't played DM before (i.e. has the same feel etc but it's not identical).

To this end it involves mimicing virtually every aspect of DM but with a few added things thrown in where it makes little difference, but would make it "better", in at least my eyes. This subdivides into things which will change the gameplay, albeit only slightly (like making the monsters act seperately rather than as a block) and those that make no difference whatsoever to gameplay but might "look" better (like the smooth lighting effects). I'm unsure about the third category; namely making major changes which will substantially effect the gameplay (in particular, my own pet crusade of not allowing spells to be cast until the relevant scroll has been found) - such things may differ too greatly from DM to be acceptable.

On top of this, and mostly because it's easy to do, RTC is intended to be easily customisable in terms of users being able to replace the dungeon design, graphics etc with those of their own. This statement is obviously open to interpretation as to how far this should go, and I guess, to a large extent, depends on what people want. Any changes however must lie within the spirit of DM and some of the things suggested so far don't (in my opinion), but many do.

It's really a question of "how similar" should RTC be to DM. I'm not in the game of copying things just for the sake of it (in particular some of the bugs that are found in DM) when a minor alteration produces something similar, but different (again though, this is open to interpretation as to "how similar"!).

As I've said before RTC is the first, and only, game that I've ever written and I'm on a massive learning curve here. The primary reason why I'm doing it is to learn how to do this sort of thing, and encounter and solve the various pitfalls along the way - it's a challenge. If anyone else can get any enjoyment out of it then that's a big bonus! I'm clearly not in it for the money (writing a clone for a 15 year game isn't exactly at the cutting edge) and I don't see this being more popular than DMute (which has been downloaded by over 500 seperate users, but only registered by 2) - but I'm more than willing to be proved wrong...

I guess that RTC won't be vastly different from what it is at the moment (with the exception of being customisable) as it's rapidly reaching the point of diminishing returns in terms of development. To (not) answer the second part of the question however, as to whether it should develop into something else, is another matter which I'm not (in the near future) looking to deal with. I'm just a student with nothing better to do but tinker with some code every now and again - in particular I'm not a major software developmemt house with the time, money and resources to produce a high quality commercial game. The idea of trying to write a first/third person 3D adventure game on my own in (rare) moments of spare time does not appeal when companies with million pound budgets try to do the same and get slated for their attempts...

In short I don't know about anything future, but I'm fairly set in my opinions about where RTC lies and what it should do. As ever though, and the reason behind setting up these message boards in the first place, I'm open to any better suggestions; I'd be very interested to know what other people think.

[amaprotu]

One request I would have is that if possible, after you have come to a level of completion you are satisfied with, for you to realease the source code. I would be very interested in not only looking at how you implemented the game but expanding on it with extra features you felt were outside the scope or to far along the curve of diminishing returns. If you do not release the source code publicly I might like to make private arrangements with you once you have finished with the project.

- Amaprotu
amaprotu@amaprotu.net

[cowsmanaut]

Well, if I used DMUTE more than 4 times I probably would have registered it. I'm not as into making the dungeons and all that as I thought I would be but the creation of new graphics has been enjoyable enough.

I think that with all the effort that you have put into this I'm willing to send off something to as thanks for your efforts.. and more than just the graphics.. I dunno maybe some sweets from Canada and a postcard or something more personal like statue of Chaos or whatever.. I can't really afford much and postage will already be a big one for me at my current income. I think you deserve something though.

Cheers to you!

[Gambit37]

I have always wanted to create my own DM style dungeons, ever since I first played the game on the Amiga. But I'm not just interested in churning out hundreds of grey walled DM style dungeons - I'd want to create a game that is in the spirit of DM using the DM rules, but that also has its own unique look and feel. This means creating not only new dungeons, but also the graphics for the walls, objects, monsters, etc. So from my point of view, I'd like RTC to be the games creation kit that Drake referred to.

However, I realise that I (and anyone else who feels this way) have absolutely no right to request RTC to fulfil this requirement. RTC is, and will always will be George's personal project, and from that point of view, I will accept RTC however George decides to release it.

I will however take some small pleasure from the fact that I have helped, in a small way, to get RTC to be the game that George originally envisioned: a clone of DM. This is one reason why I have been extensively helping to get RTC as authentic as possible, within George's original remit. I'm not a programmer, and am not inclined to program my own game, but if I and all other playtesters on this forum have helped George to achieve his programming aim, then I think that's a good thing.

With the flexibility that George has already built into RTC, I do feel that it will be able to offer the dungeon building abilties that I have always been wishing to try. If the final version of the game and it's utilities ARE released with this in mind, then I and many other potential dungeon creators will be very happy. I enjoy building 'game spaces' for many different games, and to be able to return and do the same for my all-time favourite game is the icing on the cake for me.

However, I do recognise that it's ultimately down to GG what happens to this, and I'll live with that no matter what the outcome may be. It's his project after all, and he's spent a long time getting it 'just so', and I fully understand any unwillingness to make it public domain. I'd feel the same way if I had been programming it. Indeed, I'm working on my own DM website which will always be my own project, even though I have had many offers of help - there's something about seeing a project through from start to finish that is very satisfying.

Whatever RTC ends up being, I'll always be glad that George has had the foresight and the skill to bring DM to a new audience, and perhaps add something extra too...

[beowuuf]

Like a little kid at christmas sayings 'anny wanna train anna car anna ball anna bycycle anna robot anna...' and being happy with whatever they get, i'll be more than happy with whatever direction george takes RTC - the work he has managed, full stop, not even remebering that it is his first programmed game, is phenomenal, and most impressive.

What do I like about DM? I liked the feel and detail of the world and the interaction, the balance of a simple (in terms of graphics too) interface that allowed you to forget there was an awful lot of D&D style number crunching going on behind the scenes and just play. And what I would love to do is keep playing games that have this same feel. The problem with DM is that I've seen it all before...the spells, items, monsters, locations...familiar but...I've done that. So I would love RTC to be very customisable, so that while it is still the same game and interface, it would be nice to have enough new features to make it feel fresh again. Whether this stays merely as the cosmetic, or whether it is more hidden details and complex abilities in the environment and the party, I would like to play and create what DM2 should have been, an evolved DM for the player who has been there, done it, but loved it.

That's my little say, anyway

[cowsmanaut]

Yeah, that is the perfect way to put it.. the way DM2 should have been..

I think that feeling new and fresh is a good idea but it's hard to not get outta hand with newness.. I myself have been going hog wild with ideas.. but I know that deep down inside I really would like a fresh version of DM that feels like DM and is different enough to be interesting but alike enough to feel like comming back to and old house you've lived in.

I think just adding a few new things to discover.. a new set of riddles and puzzles.. perhaps some new spells and characters.. and some new abilities.. and new monsters.. But don't take anything away unless it really shouldn't be there to begin with.

yeah.. ok I'm blabing again..

[beowuuf]

I should post laaaate at night more often then

Yes, me too, I'm just throwing out things that maybe I've thought of and seen in other games that I think would be cool...but not neccessarily in DM. Since it is george's project I'm sure he's got his own ethos he is sticking to for it, so it shouldn't be anything but sweet : )

Is it worth reposting some of the suggestions again more coherently now lots of things have been discussed in depth (spells especially seem to have a definate direction in mind, so maybe a new post for implementing it should be created?)