Eye of the Beholder - better than Dungeon Master?

[Trantor]

Of course, the question in the title is rhetorical, as every sane person (and most of the forum members) would agree that DM is a better game than EOB. Still, I found out something curious.

The little historian in me crept out again and went to look at some reviews of Eye of the Beholder from magazines "back in the day". The magazine I read in 1991 when EOB came out (to all those Germans: the Powerplay, of course!) gave it 79% (in comparison, they gave DM 95% and CSB 92%). They criticized it for missing details like not being able to close doors when a monster is under them, for being too easy and missing an automapping feature, arguing that automapping could have complemented the low difficulty to make it a great game for RPG newcomers.

While I don't actually agree with EOB being too easy - the poisonous spiders so early on were an especially huge pain in the ass the first time I played it -, I always had a similar take on EOB. It was a good game that lacked the detail, novelty and genius that made DM a timeless classic. My friends who had played both had a similar opinion, that DM was truly great while EOB was merely good.

So imagine my surprise when I discovered that lots of magazines called EOB a "step up from DM"! They cited the pretty graphics (agreed), the better sound effects (I'd like to disagree here), the easier interface (?) and the better magic system (I was shaking my head in disbelief at this). It seems the game garnered reviews above the 90% mark left and right, and with all the little flaws in EOB, especially when compared to DM, I just don't understand how this was possible. To me, the game was never on the same level as FTL's masterpiece.

How did you experience the release of EOB back then? Did anyone of you think it was just as good or even better than DM? Or did you know people who preferred EOB?

[beowuuf]

I played EOTB 2. While there were some nice touches (party talking to itself, and the plot screens and swapping out members, and some extra inventory slots) the interface just didn't feel right. They dedicated too much of the screen to the compass, party layout, etc which robbed it of one of the thigns that made DM great. Too, they stuck too much to the AD&D mechanics, especially the spell interface. (Having to waste eight hours game time to get back your spells all the time, so boring, and also the fact of the damage done to critters being perfectly mapped from D&D, when obviously the game senario pitted you against an insane amount of enemies compared to a normal tabletop RPG so it was such a trawl)

The game was deep and had many nice little twists in story and areas and puzzles, but then again the combat and D&D mechanics just made it feel like a slog at times, and in the end despite the different monster attacks it just became two square damces, and cursing when you had to retreat, learn the spell, and use it after sleeping eight hours.

[Gambit37]

I played EOB on the Amiga and immediately appreciated the improved graphics over DM. And that's a lot of what EOB is about: looking good.

All the things that set EOB apart from DM are on the aesthetic side: more colours makes for better imagery and things like the intro screens, party selection, wallsets and monsters all looked great in a true 32 colour palette, even better in 256 colours on the PC. I liked the addition of intro music and stuff but I don't think the sound effects were anything special.

However, the gameplay is average compared to DM. I got used to it pretty quick and it was perfectly usable but it just felt a bit too obvious and samey, especially the magic. DMs magic rune system was (and still is) a great piece of design and EOB comes nowhere close.

Levels in EOB are also a bit dull. There are distinct areas and puzzles in DM that everyone remembers but I can barely remember anything unique about the EOB levels. EOB2 was better in that regard, but they were both a bit flat. Still, maybe that's nostalgia talking: if you look objectively at the DM puzzles today, there's not a huge amount of innovation going on as you progress through the game -- it just somehow feels more real than EOB.

I like EOB for what it is, but DM is a superior playing experience.

[Parallax]

Are you basing the idea that one game is better than another on magazine reviews? Sorry, but that's just a bad metric. If you are going to put games on a linear scale, at least let that scale be labeled in units of fun.

I remember playing EOB through twice. Once by itself, and once as part of an EOBI, II, III sequence with the same party. Still, the only memorable feature of it I clearly recall is the stone items. Yup, those were fun.

Still, I have no memory of how EOBI compared to DM in my mind at the time. I remember Dark Crypt being hyped as a better game than DM back in the day. It wasn't. Pretty, yes, but it still was not as immersive as DM, and the sparkly spells looked downright stupid to me.

[ian_scho]

My parents bought EOB I for me, one of the first games that was actually MINE. It makes it special just for that.

I have fond memories of kicking off in the sewers, yes it was pretty wasn't it?, and it was fun. The level design didnt stick in my mind unlike DM did, and the different spell system was just that, different. Yet after all that I never thought of comparing it to DM I in terms of better or worse. Back then I just didn't have an analytical mind maybe.

I only ever played EOB I and II through once.... Yesterday I fired up DM I again (first ever time with two characters, that's YOUR fault, forum users) after something like 10 years if only to play the first three or four levels.

Is there a EOB active forum somewhere? Don't know. What makes DM I extra special for me now?... It's the community of forum users built up around it, not necessarily the game and it's mechanics.

p.s. Thanks GG.

[Trantor]

Very interesting responses. I agree with Gambit on practically everything. Naturally, nostalgia will have a huge influence when you play such old games today. I was 12 when I first played DM, and it was the first game I played that was completely mouse-driven. The only RPG I played before was Ultima V with its zillion of complicated keyboard commands, so DM just exploded in my brain.

When I first read about EOB, I remember being angry with Westwood for completely ripping DM off. When it came out and I took a look, it was a charming, pretty game, and I greatly enjoyed it. Up until today, I finished it about 5 times, with another 3 times for EOB2. Granted, that's not much compared to the 12-15 times I completed CSB or the 30+ times I went through DM - but compared to the 2 times I played through DM2, it's not so bad.

Still, the game never stuck to me like DM did, and it wasn't just because it was a rip-off. The level design was just boring, every level was a maze with little structure to it. In DM, I always felt that every level had some sort of unique identity, be it through the monsters (like the "worm level" and the "knight level") or through the layout itself (like the treasure rooms, the Tomb of the Firestaff or the Arena). Also, EOB wasn't as deep, there were no timing puzzles, no encumbrance, food and water weren't separated and so on. The only thing where it really surpassed DM, in my opinion, was graphics.

I always had the impression that practically nobody thought EOB was better than DM, but those reviews proved me wrong (unless SSI paid the mags to write that). As far as I know, there is no EOB community today such as this DM one, so that may be prove enough that most people agree with me.

[zoom]

EOB was a good game I enjoyed.

I did not create whimpy characters,
as Beo apparently did, but maxed
out HPs, and stats to 18/19 ...
Then it was ok in terms of progress..

There where really good parts in it.

For starters, there was a sequel and
you could transfer your party to eob2/3

I really liked the idea of
party members joining you.

You could free them
(from some dangerous situations),
meet them (somewhere) or
ressurrecting a few
(with your friend, the dwarven cleric).

[Favourite was Kirath the mage who had
a disintegrate spell,not found anywhere in game,
and the pretty blone cleric chick Ileria who had 56 hps
that was like 10 HP more than the possible maximum
at that level]


level wise: not as sound as dm..
some levels felt quite good, but the integrity somehow
did not get across..

mysterious special quests for each level..
cool colour of message,
but rather cryptic "beyond comprehension"
(no hints anywhere)

The idea of STone Tablets which then could be used to
activate portals (cool-ly animated)
had been a new invention I guess.


level graphics where really nice then. No questions.
looked different.
(not like in dm,where you got "night and day" but...)

I especially enjoyed the mantis
level dunno why..maybe also bcs of monsters there..

Items where great, ok ok, I like collecting all the sup[er
stuff you can get (admittedly sometimes
lame names for magic weapons, not to match dm's fury..
eob would call that probably flame sword??
had a nice long sword +5 of Beohram, Paladin called
Severious +5)
(but some items in eob looked cool, jagged longsword
and sabre like short swords. Magic Banded Mail +4)

Somehow just being ad&d was a good thing back then.
the magic system had been something you got used to,
and if you like cheated with the beginning chars
(a legal option) you had enough spells and muscle

Then , at some time I tried to hex edit items.
Was fun to make some sort of list.
(was never able to do that with dm and
was more the technical side to a game than
actually playing it)

I am an rpg geek/freak I guess.

Anyway ,dm is better!@ As said , it has greater
immersion and feels more potent, not unfair!

[Des]

I enjoyed playing EOB 1,2 and 3 on the Amiga.

In gameplay terms it was a mistake to mimic AD&D (especially the magic system) but in sales terms it was a great idea to ensare D&D fans.

Of course people on this forum are biased, but I do seriously think DM is a much better designed and more original game, and thus deserves its godlike status amongst retro gaming fans.

[Marco]

I happened to like both series. The main strength of the EoB series is in its presentation -- I'm normally not a sucker for pretty eye candy, but EoB looked good compared to DM. The games were very fluid, and on a technical level, I found them quite impressive.

Beyond the graphical aspect, the design of the dungeons was well done with EoB II and III. I'll agree that the dungeon in EoB I was nothing special. But EoB II especially has some fairly intricate levels, atmospheric dungeon design, and some particularly interesting, downright nasty situations (like when you're trapped on a two-level complex with constantly-regenerating monsters where you cannot ever sleep because you are plagued with nightmares). In fairness to DM, though, nothing in EoB approaches the intricacies of DM, with all the little hidden stairways leading to unexpected spots in the dungeon.

The challenge in EoB is very reasonable. I suspect that the people who found EoB easy were the ones that created their own characters with maxed-out statistics, HP, etc. If you did that, then yes, the games would not be anywhere near as challenging as DM. In my opinion, allowing us to do that was a mistake by the developers (and yes, I am also guilty as charged, your honor). Yet even so, there were plenty of tight spots, like the level full of beholders in EoB II -- no matter how beefed-up my characters were, that place is a death-trap.

I did find the magic system to be a serious weakness. I dislike the D&D magic system. And I also detest all the pointless limitations: this character can't use these weapons, this race can't become these classes, and so on and on and on. I've played and enjoyed D&D, and in tabletop gaming sessions, I even enjoyed all the silly idiosyncracies (kind of like the annoying relatives you have to put up with every year over Christmas -- deep inside you like them, but can only handle them in limited doses). So I did not particularly enjoy having those same idiosyncracies inflicted upon me during my computer gaming for no apparent reason other than to pander to the D&D fans. Something DM had which EoB did not is flexibility. Any character could be any "class" they wanted.

Another area where DM stood out was with the fresh monsters. I liked the fact that the majority of the monsters in DM were unrecognizable to a D&D veteran. For the most part, EoB's enemies held no surprises. But nothing in DM could be taken for granted. I love computer games that break away from the fantasy gaming paradigm established by D&D, and one of the most obvious areas to do this is in the monsters you have to kill. That's probably why I liked Lands of Lore so much, where almost every creature is totally foreign.

Marco.

[Antman]

I loved EOB I and Eob II and Black Crypt, possibly more than DM. Probably because my version of DM when I was young was extremely buggy due to the copy protection, although my brother was able to somehow edit it re-enable saving so playing through the game was still possible. CSB was always my unquestioned favorite though. Still haven't played through DM II, have never managed to get a version to run smoothly enough.

Anyway, aside from all this talk of EOB I and II and looking at all the graphics Gambit provided making me want to clock these games again, it made me remember something. When you clock EOB I getting the the special level quests on EVERY level, you get a secret password/code at the end of the game. Does anybody know what this was for? Could never find a reference on the net to it.

[zoom]

I hardly doubt anyone to be able to fulfill each special quest, not
to mention getting an alleged "secret code".
To be honest I think this is a red herring... unless I can be
convinced otherwise

there was a thread some time ago, I posted a link to a site.
it had some of the EOB/EOtB special quests described ,
but some were missing.

E.g I never bothered to play gnomes. You would, how
ever need one for the dagger on lv1

DMII has some features you do not notice on first glance.
I did not like it very much in the beginning, but it was ok.
Too short and the monsters in my version did not look right.
It probably had to live up to too high of an expectation and
was too late delivered.

[Trantor]

It's not very hard to track down all the special quests for EOB 1 on the net, and it seems this password thing is real, as I read about it on several sites. However, everywhere is the same question: What good is it for? I'm afraid Westwood just didn't know what to do with it either and it's just useless. Maybe it was planned to give some sort of bonus for EOB 2...

[Marco]

As far as I know, the password thing is bogus. I played the game several times through and always completed all the special quests, and don't ever remember getting a password for my efforts. The quests themselves weren't that hard, once you knew about them, and I was able to figure most of them out myself. The remainder of the solutions I got straight from SSI when I sent them a letter asking for a hint (they sent me a typewritten page that looks like it was some sort of internal memo about the game).

Marco.

[zoom]

It's not very hard to track down all the special quests for EOB 1 on the net

prove it , Trantor. I doubt it

[Trantor]

http://www.the-spoiler.com/RPG/SSI/eob.2.html

http://home.comcast.net/~maryb181/eob1ques.htm

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/eyeofthe ... pid=564791

If you want more, just google "Eye of the Beholder special quests"...

[Antman]

I'm 100% sure the secret code exists, it was only four letters/numbers long I think, B G F and 4 all come to mind... But can't really remember. Trantor, where did you find mention of the secret code? Special quests are definitely on the net and not too hard to accomplish. I'm getting more and more tempted to finished the game and grab a screen shot of the code.....not good, not good.

[zoom]

ok, I give it to you Trantor!
back then I was not able to get hold of a complete list.

edit:
I still think all are in part incomplete
The first, being at first glance real great and exhaustive,
would not tell you what a special quest yields/does.
btw, a real nice coloured font that special quest note)
the others have some questions in some later levels, so
the people are not sure themselves.
But more than I found myself back then.. :0

Antman , reminds me of
BGF 4000 , big F*cking Gun out of doom

[Trantor]

Actually, you are talking about the BFG9000 zoom.

Antman, in this youtube video, there is a comment where someone mentions he did get the message.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ4CInWN ... re=related

And this forum entry asks what the password (supposedly "5493") is about. Sadly, nobody gave an answer.
http://www.abandonware-forums.org/showt ... hp?t=25684

[Antman]

Hmmm it truly is a mystery what it is for then...

That message that was mentioned in that forum is definitely what I remember.

Yeah, BFG came to my mind as well for some reason, must be getting EOB and Doom confused again.

[Seriously Unserious]

I played EOB 1 on my Amiga, but never was able to finish EOB2, my Amiga packed it in before I could finish, I made it as far as that "the floor feels soft" room saved and never got to play agian.

Too bad too, it was a good game. Still DM has to be my favorate of the 2 though. I agree that the magic system in EOB was a bit too cumbersome for a real-time RPG, it works fine for the turn-based games, but I'd have done it a bit differently for a real time game though. The graphics were an improvement, but as for diffuculty, I remember some puzzles would have some obscure solution with absolutely no clues as to what that would be and would require a lot of careful searching around in area where powerful monsters tend to regenerate. That lead to me getting stuck in a few areas fow long stretches of time before could find that hidden button or key or whatever and be able to move on. It's just plain hard to seach for something when you have some stupid mind flayer or something nasty like that ambushing you while you are staring at walls trying to find the tiny switch that you can't see unless you face the wall directly.

Of course, DM does have it's areas like that, but most puzzles have some clue as to the solution so you can try and figure it our without all the annoying trial and error of EOB. I'd have to say that's where they went wrong more than anything, is in the level development.

[Erik Bauer]

Certainly EoB and Black Crypt were more "Eye Candy" than DM: more colors, different wall sets for different levels and both brang some innovations to the genere, but none of them could give the same level of immersion that DM achieved.
The reasons were mainly 4:

1) Real Time: While in EoB and BK opening/closing a door or casting a spell happened in a Tick of the system (or in a Turn if you want to speak Roleplayish) in DM they occurred in real time allowing you to dodge incoming attacks or to literally close the door on the head of a monster. But above all it gave you the impression of a consistent and real world.

2)Darkness: DM had different gradients of light depending on the status of the wielded torch or by the power of the light spell cast. The other games had just completely Light- totally Dark at their best

3)Sound: I found DM sound effects to be more real than the rival counterpats. It could be due to both better quality and better realtime 3D sound simulation (In DM you could actually figure the position of a nearby monster just by judging his stepping sounds if you played with headphones).

4)Little details: DM had little grass brushes, pools of water, hooks, wall cracks that helped you to better recognize your actual position despite having to look at the same wallset over and over. It also helped your mind to belive the dungeon was more real. On the top of that I must say that having in EoB a monster flashing every time it was hit definitely killed realism!
On top of that in DM you had to both keep track of food and water where in the others you just had food (if nothing)


As a conclusion I put DM on a higher rank than the other two and I would consider both Crystal Dragon and Evil's Doom better contenders for the throne.