Games that inspire a modern remake of Dungeon Master

[bone]

I very much want to see a modern game in the Dungeon Master theme and design. I've played Age of Conan, The Elder Scrolls IV and others.. None of them do it. They all feel like dumbed down RPG games to me. But I like to see elements in the latest games that remind of what a Dungeon Master inspired dungeon hack & slash game could be and that is the point of this thread.

Last year I posted about Bioshock and how there were places in the game that remind me of Dungeon Master. Their first game was very similar to DM iirc.

In any case, I recently played Devil May Cry 4 and there are many elements that remind me of how awesome a modern remake could/would be. Of course, there are many differences with DMC4, too. Here I'll just highlight the graphical elements which I think would be awesome for a remake.

Here are some screenshots. Under each screenshot I'll make comments.



That's a very nice fireball effect!!



That's a great looking pickup item for a dungeon. Imagine it sitting in an alcove. What would it do? Wield for thunderbolt power or something, I don't know.



Another really cool looking item. It is sitting behind that metal grate door but there's no button! How do I get it!



A nice looking hallway. Great stone textures and lighting.



A nice staircase and lanturn.



Now we can have much more slimy murky dungeons with modern graphics engines.



Another cool pickup item. It looks just like something that would fit into an inventory slot.



Nice watery & gothic feel here. Ultima Underworld used water better than Dungeon Master but I think it would fit well into a modern remake. Water, done well, adds greatly to the atmospheric and other aspects to a dungeon.



Looks cool. This is what Chaos has been looking for for the past ten years! It is guarded by five dragons, each of which breathe different elements.



This kind of professional quality is what I'd so love to see (in a modern DM-like game).



This is a small ghost that wanders a few levels up from the Stone Golems. It glows and lights its surroundings. In one puzzle you must keep them alive so that you can walk around the trap door pits. Then the fire elementals bring their own light later on..



More murky dungeon.

So the talent and money is out there, we, as a community, need to push a developer to make a *proper* modern remake of Dungeon Master!!

[zoom]

sure, top notch graphics are nice to behold.
But there are voices that say they are fine with the existing graphics of DM. I see why. to make it short: gameplay and atmoshere(yes, exactly what you go for with modern graphics)
I also see why a game with pimped up graphics could suck big time and utterly fail in accomplishing something remotely dm-ique.
going 3d interferes with dm's step by step movement. It is like a clockwork. tick tack tick tack. In 3d, like the first fireball screenshot,you cannot evade it properly, because there are no blocks the fireball moves to fro and hither to. But 3d loses potential with block mode ..and here you are.

another point about the atmoshere: modern graphics can give the game atmoshere, if you put more effort into nifty details - which adds at increased resolution by very much, because you notice easily.. speak of being spoiled or expecting a continous level of quality which does not look out of whack/lopsided
Imho,
in nearly all screenshots you provided, the walls look a bit sparse.Sorry not enough for me
The last screenshot is ok, probably because of block mode feel.

anyway , I really would like to have a modern dm game, don't get me wrong. But I don't want an insane rush on something probably most people did not understand far enough.
I really believe Dungeon Master Next Gen GaMe must be a completely new game because there
are issues with interface and input and , as said with mode of gameplay. YOu see it would not guarantee to be successful at at all.
Another factor would be that with that of an enormous project, you really would want to get money for the game, which, as it stands is not possible because the copyright is not free.
well, opinions?

[bone]

Hmm... Well thanks for your reply. I think.

You seem rather down on the idea. Whatever.

Anyone else have something positive to say? Ho hum drum is the mood here? Bah humbug?

You are all stuck in the past. DM is great, sure. Now see how almost all modern RPG's piss on the genre to dumb it down for the masses who never knew better.

See how something modern in the spirit of D.M. would totally rock. Diablo III shows what is possible with money, talent and planning. There are even some great ideas in there too. But even D3 isn't trying to be a true RPG, but an action RPG.

D.M. was all about pushing the edge of technology and innovating new ideas.

[beowuuf]

Well, i think if you go specific to the spirit of DM, then no rpg has carried on it;s ideals - which were emersive interface, keepign the mechanics as far back as possible

If you are going broad into games, then half life carried on this tradition making the interface immersive and in the background - you could interact with the world, even in silly ways, and even the cinematic 'cut scenes' did not break out of the first person interface, so you were never out of the game world. And the initial subway ride alone showed off the tech of the time, as you had that huge world interracting around you

[Paul Stevens]

You are all stuck in the past.

No doubt about it. I even enjoy
music written by Bach. Silly, ain't it?

[cowsmanaut]

funny statement indeed, as even the game itself is based on the past, a fantasy past, but the past all the same.

Some other things to think about is the pure fact that Dungeon master has ultimately died because those with the rights to it, do not care to continue it further.

Lastly, this forum and various other websites have been around for a VERY long time.. I came to this community around 1999. Others in 1998. That's 10 years of established and continued growth for the fan presence on the web. We have been seen and noticed by the creators of the game. We have been seen and noticed by magazines. Yet nothing has happened outside of our community.. so how exactly to you propose we make those people somehow MORE aware of our interest? How do you plan to "push" them to make a new DM?

There have been a number of promising clones. DM2000, Entombed, and the less elabourate DMBuilder, who have used more modern methods such as 3D rendering and particles, lighting, etc. Any of these could have been taken and run with by developers.

They know we are here.. they know we love the game... we are not 50,000,000 people.. we're about 1000 people.. do you know the average budget for a video game?

Devil may cry had about a 2 million dollar budget *at least*. we're looking at about $2000 per copy if they just wanted to make their money back. typically for a 2mil game, they will need to sell roughly 40,000 copies at about $60 each before it actually becomes a reasonable risk, it's a small profit for them, but survivable. more likley 60,000 copies where it now pays for the next title as well, or allows them to make a higher budget game, hire more people, expand to make more than one title at a time, etc.

So, it's not all about being "stuck in the past", it's also about realistic expectations.

[beowuuf]

I think the idea was not to remake dungoen master, but carry on the feel of dungeon master into a new game.

However, I believe WoW has now created a pinacle of certain RPG styles that is seen as how all RPGs should be in many people's mind.

Final Fantasy has come in from the other side, although even it now bows to being dumbed down.

I do not believe the industry itself nor the current gaming scene shows enough support to want a more involved RPG experience that would capture the intangible feel of Dm

As I said before, if we are looking outside the DM/RPG mold then thigns like Half Life reminded me of Dm in my reaction to it. It could very well be some variant of that, branching back into the fantasy/RPG world, might show us a DM we want.

Exept, as pointed out, games are now hugely budgeted affairs. The success of a 25 year old game will never been seen as something to emulate - instead, many games are pushed to emulte the newest success of the newest fad

[star1300]

I happen to know the FTL Games developers who created the original DM series. They made great games but the company was just not able to survive the changing tides in the game biz of their time. Their greatest success came on the Atari ST and Amiga which began losing ground to increasingly popular PC and console systems which soon became far more lucrative for game developers and publishers. FTL was unfortunately late in making the jump to PC (DOS and early Windows) and the PC games did not measure up to the original versions. They could not realize their vision for DM on the less capable (compared to STs and Amigas) consoles of that era, but did license certain console rights to others to develop DM games (JVC); these were fairly successful, but again did not fully measure up to the original games. As time went by, it became obvious that they were underfunded to make the transition to high-end PC and console game development with their rapidly increasing development budgets and much longer development timeframes. I think they finally decided to go out on a high note rather than try to compete in a much higher stakes business and risk tarnishing the legacy of DM by releasing new games that did not measure up to their earlier ones or to games being released by much better funded publishers. In the years after FTL closed shop and the owners went their separate ways (mostly out of the game biz), they were not interested in licensing the rights for sequels and risking legacy destruction by others. It was never a case of them not wanting their faithful fans to be rewarded with a revival of the property; it was quite the opposite... they didn't want to disappoint with substandard DM games. Now, I think that they would love to see a competent publisher revive and reinvent this classic franchise for the 21st century. But in today's game biz, a major publisher would probably have to commit minimum $15-$20 million USD to realize a A-AAA quality game across multiple platforms plus marketing, PR, manufacturing, plus license fee and ongoing royalties to DM licensor. That means that they have to be very confident that they can sell at least a million units of the game to even break even. It is a difficult industry in 2008 to make a bet on an RPG license like DM when the genre has changed so dramatically. And most publishers keep churning out sequels to their recent hits because there's less risk. Rarely do they take on the risk of trying to create a brand new game franchise (or revive an old one). It's too bad but frankly I have serious doubts that there are any publishers out there today who have both the vision and the guts necessary to attempt reinventing the DM franchise. It would take a LOT more than 1000 dedicated fans on this site to convince any one of them. Need more like a grass roots movement of much bigger proportions. But we can dream.

[Tom Hatfield]

The next DM will be made by fans. As such, it won't be glamorous in a popular sense, but it could stand up to its predecessors and wow the niche. The tools to build it will likely be free or home-brewed, and the total number of man-hours will be counted in spare time, comprised primarily of weekends and holidays. When it's released, it will be playable but incomplete, and there will be mod tools and a map editor. They might be hard to use since they were likely designed by one person, with little or no community input.

Although, I'm rather jumping ahead of myself. If you want to get practical, Zyx already made the next DM with the Conflux iterations. It has achieved what I assume he considers "finished" status, and the fans did in fact eat it up. I liked it, though I couldn't get into it for the insane difficulty; most of my enjoyment came from reading the threads. ;) To be marketable, an official DM successor has to be dumbed down and made accessible to the masses. Conflux is the opposite. Thus, it is not a market successor, but I would call it a true successor, in that it captures and even extends the spirit of DM.

And, if we're coming from that direction, DMII wasn't even a "true" successor in that sense. It carried on many of the elements that made DM popular, but it did away with most of the clever puzzle solving in exchange for key hunts and ephemeral thrills. The open economy also broke the game, in that you never had to ration your items or food. That's not to say I didn't like DMII; I very much did, but it wasn't the same game at all.

I hope to be one of those folks who releases a genuine spiritual successor, but I'm bound by the same restrictions as everyone else: real life, and I'm not getting paid for it, nor would I want to, because selling your soul takes away from the final product.

If there is to be a modern DM, it will be the original DM (and sequels) with much better graphics and atmosphere. It may be marketable, but it won't sell very well, and it will be the last of its kind. Besides, we'll have already played it. It'll be the same pony with a new trick. That's all. The DM legacy will be carried on by fans, as always.

[beowuuf]

Oops, I guess spotted home internet and reading this thread at work but being busy meant I didn't reply

Welcome to the forum star1300! Thanks for your insights on FTL and the industry, I think it conforms what we sadly thought, and what bone was perhaps annoyed at us for feeling. Certainly, one can look at innovations and applaud them in the industry (I don't follow gaming that much except for the sideline,s so cannot say what new games show sparks of what the FTL philosophy might have done were they designing now). However, it will be luck and serendipity, not us asking for the game, that will produce a RPG like DM again. However, certainly the potential is there, anyone wanting to get back to RPG will need a new route instead of the FF or WoW engines...

Also, one of these days Gambit might get the chance to get to the DMCodex, at which time he might like to be able to quote your above comment, and maybe even ask you more!

Again, welcome to the forums, sorry we seem to be a little quiet at the moment!

[Roquen]

I mostly agree with star1300's comments, based on the assumption of wanting to see a DM franchise revival through traditional publishing & distribution channels. star1300 discusses the perspective of a publisher (or large dev house) which all have high risk-avoidance tendencies due to stated financial reasons. At the other end of the spectrum, small development houses typically live “hand-to-mouth” and don’t have enough cash reserves to devote resources to working on a project without a publisher backing the project.

What would be required would be convincing a set of experienced game programmers and artists that have been successful enough to semi financially independent to take the risk of creating a completely working “proof-of-concept” to convince a publisher of the project's merit.

I personally think that a computer version is out of the question due to expectations of modern games. However a platform like the Nintendo DS might be feasible.

-- (added 20080811)

The game would have to be very convincing because (even with near-zero development cost) the risk is still very high.

The publisher would have to:

1) Track down the IP holder(s), negotiate a royalty plan which would mostly likely involve an up-front fee.
2) Manufacture some number of units. For sake of discussion let’s say a small first production of 100,000 units. If the cost-of-goods is $10, that’s already 1mil.
3) Do at least a minimal amount of advertising. Call that 100K.

(These numbers only meant to be illustrative)

And the hypothetical development team would have to be willing to accept not only the possibility of not getting published, but also the opposite end of the spectrum. The game sells well. What’s the problem? They don’t own the IP, so they would be at the mercy of the IP holders and the publisher for any future involvement.

[Crash.]

What about the independent PC games industry? A friend of mine writes and releases indie PC games, which are electronically distributed and definitely do not have even a 1 million dollar budget. There are a number of high quality games that come out of this industry, many that use 3D graphics engines, and have excellent sound and graphic design. They do not all use state of the art technologies or hundreds of hours of voice work and motion capture, but I don't think that this is necessary for a modern Dungeon game.

To see some recent indie games, here is a place to start:

http://www.igf.com/02finalists.html

Additionally, I wonder if one of the DM clones that the geniuses here have developed could be mated to one of the open source 3D game engines. I'm sure this would be a lot of work, but would be interested to hear opinions on the prospect.

Here are a few open source 3D engines to look at:

http://irrlicht.sourceforge.net/features.html
http://irrlicht.sourceforge.net/screens ... jects.html
http://www.delta3d.org/
http://www.delta3d.org/index.php?topic=projects
http://www.ogre3d.org/
http://www.ogre3d.org/index.php?set_alb ... _album.php

Some of these look like games/simulations look quite current.

Someone even made a indie 3D Dungeon game with one of these engines:
http://www.3dnews.ru/download/games/demos/duntech/

The developer is working on a sequel too:
http://www.greatgamesexperiment.com/user/area51

I would imagine if I dig deeper, I'll find a handful of dungeon games from indie developers using these open source engines. Maybe one of them just needs a push in the right direction.

Cheers!

[Gambit37]

Regarding tracking down the source IP owner. That person is Wayne Holder, original owner of FTL. I have it on very good authority that he has zero interest in Dungeon Master these days and considers it part of his past.

That said, everyone has their price...

[Roquen]

Gambit37:

Humm...that's either a really good thing, or really bad.


Crash:

We're all off on our own tangents, so as long as it's either not-for-profit or just inspired-by...why not?

[Crash.]

Well I hope I didn't start a new tangent...

What I was trying to do was respond to the original message, which suggested pushing a developer to make a modern DM style game. While this would be wonderful, I think it is highly unlikely since the gaming industry is currently infatuated with third person and top view RPGs, while the first person dungeon crawls are few and far between. The industry has a lot of inertia, and tends to copy whatever was recently successful rather than bucking the trends.

Since FTL is gone, Interplay is gone, the owners of DM have moved on, and no one has stepped up to buy the rights (like Bethesda did with Fallout), I think an official DM remake is currently unlikely. Most companies simply aren't willing to take the financial risk of resurrecting a great old game, when they can throw their money away on yet another WOW clone or whatever.

So, what I was suggesting that it might be possible to convince an Indie or hobby game designer to take on the challenge of creating a modern dungeon game. It could take inspiration from great first person action RPGs of the past, but use modern 3D accelerated graphics and sound now possible.

I wanted to mention the topic, not because I'm planning on championing the cause or trying to convince anyone here that it is the best thing to do, but just to see what your opinions are. I was wondering of the game logic designed by some of the brilliant Dungeon Masters here could be interfaced with a 3D engine that would render the game world, items, and creatures. Could something like DSB, for example, get a 3D treatment?

Just because the view is being rendered with models and textures does not necessarily mean that the step motion style has to be dropped in favor of free 3D movement. Mouselook 3D movement would interfere with most of the important play mechanics. I would be interested in seeing a new 3D game with pure step motion, as well as transitioned steps similar to the rendered implentation used in "Stonekeep" - perhaps with the ability to choose, based on user preference. Otherwise, I would prefer to see other the game mechanics pretty much unaltered.

As long as we're discussing a modern remake, what's the deal with the handful of 3D DM clones in progress? Could any of these be the games to look forward to?

Anyway, just trying to be a little less lurky :p

[Roquen]

If you just want a version of DM with eye and ear candy, then the programming side is almost trival. The real work would be generating all the 3D models, textures and audio assets.

[linflas]

As long as we're discussing a modern remake, what's the deal with the handful of 3D DM clones in progress? Could any of these be the games to look forward to?

Try Entombed. http://www.entombed.co.uk/

[Gambit37]

Personally I don't think that 3D suits DM, in any fashion. The step movement was part of the block type dungeon, the two go hand in hand.

As soon as you move to true 3D, people are gonna expect free movement. If you artificially constrain the motion to the four cardinal directions to simulate DM, where is the benefit of the 3D engine? Your level design would have to remain in 10 foot blocks to feel like DM, which to me rather negates the point of switching to the 3D engine. I love the old school feel of DM, but I also love the big, lush, epic environments of modern games and trying to shoe horn one into the other doesn't really make sense to me.

DM suited the tech at the time. As soon as you move to 3D, it's no longer got what made DM great -- brilliant design that came from a constrained environment.

A 3D game using a modern engine could certainly be made, but I personally think it's pointless. If you want dungeon style games in a 3D engine, then play something like Oblivion. Not to take away from the great works that the 3D clone makers have done (Dungeon Maker, Entombed, etc.) but once they've gone past tech demo stage, the projects have died. OK, that'll be partly because it's hard to maintain enthusiasm for something in your spare time, but I'd wager it's also because when we've tried them out, they simply don't "feel" like DM.

Just my opinion. I'm probably in a minority.

[Sophia]

Could something like DSB, for example, get a 3D treatment?

Since you specifically mentioned DSB, I'll chime in...

Most of the general points Gambit made apply to DSB, certainly. The game's mechanics are 2D and a shift to 3D would create some "interesting" new difficulties.

For example, step movement. Granted, the step movement could be preserved, and have smooth animation between the different positions, but the game might still feel a bit stiff. Monster movement would have the same problem. Again, the motion could be "tweened," but the resulting movement patterns might still appear blocky. And, of course, someone would have to create 3D models for the various monsters... and it wouldn't be me.

Slightly less troublesome might be to display flat polygons containing the sprites on them. However, using standard DM graphics, a major drop in quality between the walls (which would be textured and 3D) and everything else (which would be standard DM graphics, unless someone creates something new) would be quite readily apparent, and probably not all that pleasant to look at. Of course, this would also probably induce a few headaches in the programmer (in this case, me!) in trying to get the math right to map the DM perspective to a 3D view.

Finally, and least interesting to most of you (but most bothersome to me), a shift to 3D would require some major changes in how the DSB renderer works. Right now, the game is essentially CPU driven and uses the GPU for almost nothing: Bitmaps are put together in a software buffer and pushed to VRAM like they did it in the 90s. There is a lot of manipulation of bitmaps in memory, and this would all have to be rewritten in a 3D (probably OpenGL, I am clueless about D3D) friendly way. As the bitmaps would now have to be "uploaded" into the GPU's memory, some of these manipulations would have to be precomputed, and things like that. It's not a terribly big deal, but it is another gotcha for me to worry about. GL is good at shoving polygons around, but it's not so good at sending lots of junk back and forth over the graphics card's bus.

I'm sure this is probably boring by now... so I'll just leave it by saying... it's a big mess from a technical standpoint and for the reasons Gambit pointed out and others I'm not sure if it's worth it.

[Crash.]

where is the benefit of the 3D engine?

Things like lighting effects, animation, bump mapping, fog, water, particle effects, transparency, and selectable resolution. I don't think we'll ever see a bitmap based DM game with 1600x1200 native resolution, but that would definitely be possible with a 3D engine based game. For that matter, even if a 3D engine was used just to place the bitmaps the way that they normally would be, there would be the potential benefits of hardware acceleration such as scaling, lighting, shading, and speed. Even if the entire game window was just displayed on a square polygon, it would allow the resolution to be scaled with hardware.

Your level design would have to remain in 10 foot blocks to feel like DM

Yes, but I really don't see a problem with that since the unconstrained movement would not add anything, but would create problems. The point is, that while classic DM is constrained to steps and 90 degree turns, it is still quite fun and immersive. As soon as it becomes unconstrained, it ceases to be the same type of game. I personally think that the movement system in "Stonekeep" worked, and that is what I would like to see done in realtime 3D vs the pre-rendered transitions used there.

trying to shoe horn one into the other doesn't really make sense to me.

I can understand that, but all I'm really suggesting is using modern technology to render the view window.

DM suited the tech at the time. As soon as you move to 3D, it's no longer got what made DM great -- brilliant design that came from a constrained environment.

Again, I would be opposed to any changes to the constrained movement, as it would require a total redesign of almost all of the game mechanics.

A 3D game using a modern engine could certainly be made, but I personally think it's pointless. If you want dungeon style games in a 3D engine, then play something like Oblivion.

In my opinion, no modern game such as Oblivion has a single dungeon that is as fun, interesting, or immersive as Dungeon Master or any of its clones. I would be happy to go back to 10 foot blocks at 90 degrees if it meant that even one of these games might have a decent dungeon.

Not to take away from the great works that the 3D clone makers have done (Dungeon Maker, Entombed, etc.) but once they've gone past tech demo stage, the projects have died. OK, that'll be partly because it's hard to maintain enthusiasm for something in your spare time, but I'd wager it's also because when we've tried them out, they simply don't "feel" like DM.

This is just what I'm getting at. There are a half dozen 3D DM clones in progress. I would imagine that the people developing these are bogged down with re-designing the game logic, and re-designing the game mechanics to suit the freelook/mouselook 3D environment - but it is a dead end. I think that is the hidden pitfall. Going to unconstrained 3D breaks the game design irreparably, so don't do it. A freelook game will no longer play or feel like DM, and doesn't leave your hand free to cast spells, throw things, or press buttons while you're moving around with the other hand. Freelook is simply not compatible with a DM style game, but that doesn't mean that 3D rendering would not offer some benefit.

So I wonder, do any, or could any of the 3D DM clones benefit from being constrained to only steps and 90 degree turns? Also, have any of the established remakes been considered as the the basis for the game logic for in one of these projects?

Just my opinion. I'm probably in a minority.

I'm not even sure about that, but I was just wondering if this had been discussed or attempted.

Cheers!

[Crash.]

Since you specifically mentioned DSB, I'll chime in...

Well thank you. I definitely want to hear from someone who know's what it takes to make the dungeon come to life.

Most of the general points Gambit made apply to DSB, certainly. The game's mechanics are 2D and a shift to 3D would create some "interesting" new difficulties.

Again, while it is _possible_ to design a completely 3D dungeon game, since it wouldn't play like Dungeon Master, it is a different type of game completely (Ultima Underworld perhaps). I've thought of ways to get around the issues, but I think too much would have to be altered, so one might as well start over completely.

For example, step movement. Granted, the step movement could be preserved, and have smooth animation between the different positions, but the game might still feel a bit stiff. Monster movement would have the same problem. Again, the motion could be "tweened," but the resulting movement patterns might still appear blocky. And, of course, someone would have to create 3D models for the various monsters... and it wouldn't be me.

I can imagine that it wouldn't be perfect, but to be honest, few if any fully 3D games have completely realistic movement either. Parts of character models pass through walls or other solid objects, there is no inertia or momentum, enemies can get so close to you that you cannot attack them, while they can attack you, etc... The way that it worked in "Stonekeep" (pre-rendered 3D) was fine with me, such that if you were stepping forward onto a square when the monster did the same, one party got shoved back. I'm sure there would be plenty of issues to resolve regarding creature animation and movement, but I would hope they could follow the same basic movement rules as they do in a DM type of game, and changes in pose or animation have to be addressed in any 3D game.

As far as modelling, I would be much more productive in 3D than I could ever be in 2D pixel art. Who knows, maybe there could be a way to use Spore creatures, or those created with available tools like Gmax.

Slightly less troublesome might be to display flat polygons containing the sprites on them. However, using standard DM graphics, a major drop in quality between the walls (which would be textured and 3D) and everything else (which would be standard DM graphics, unless someone creates something new) would be quite readily apparent, and probably not all that pleasant to look at. Of course, this would also probably induce a few headaches in the programmer (in this case, me!) in trying to get the math right to map the DM perspective to a 3D view.

Hmmm... I think I have an experiment to work on

Bitmaps are put together in a software buffer and pushed to VRAM like they did it in the 90s. There is a lot of manipulation of bitmaps in memory, and this would all have to be rewritten in a 3D (probably OpenGL, I am clueless about D3D) friendly way.

Forgive my ignorance with regard to how all of this actually works, but is there any benefit (performance or otherwise) to assembling these bitmaps on the video card rather than the way they are currently done? I'm thinking in terms of sending the whole graphics set to the video card, then having it create the game window by assembling those elements. Would it be a lot of work for nothing?

I'm sure this is probably boring by now... so I'll just leave it by saying... it's a big mess from a technical standpoint and for the reasons Gambit pointed out and others I'm not sure if it's worth it.

Can you see any things that you would like to be able to do, but can only be done via 3D technology? I personally see the graphics as the part of a DM style game that is most in need of an update.

Thanks!

[Paul Stevens]

I personally see the graphics as the part of a DM style game that is most in need of an update.

I'm not sure if it's worth it.

IMHO.....

A beautifully updated Dungeon Master would be
very nice and the folks that loiter here would accept
it gratefully. I doubt that you would get an
argument about this. But it is quite plain to me
that nobody is going to do this kind of work
unless they are a bit crazy. I was crazy to make
CSBwin. George was a bit crazy to make RTC.
Sophia was a bit crazy to make DSB. Et cetera.
None of these folks thinks that adding wonderful
eye candy would be worth the effort. So the
only problem we have is to find some soul who
thinks the graphics would make a big difference
and is crazy enough to accept the challenge of
investing a substantial part of his life in such a
project.

Then, when it is done, the even bigger need
would be to find a person like Zyx who is crazy
enough to invest a large part of his life in
producing a dungeon to fit the beautiful graphics
capability. Because without that.....the whole
effort is wasted.

In short, the idea of a prettier DM is a good idea
and the only question is "Who will do it". So
far we have received several "Not I" responses.

[beowuuf]

Gambit and cows had even started this task, and I think both found that there was no added impetus to complete it, because it would only really benefit a game everyone has already played. It is a shame that it can't get a facelift, but i think it needs to be done almost on the way for someone to do their own dungeon.

[Gambit37]

Well, I was only updating to RTC resolution anyway (640x480) -- anyone expecting the visual quality of a modern game would expect to be able to run at any resolution they choose (within reason) and 640 x 480 simply doesn't cut it for a modern gaming experience.

[Sophia]

Forgive my ignorance with regard to how all of this actually works, but is there any benefit (performance or otherwise) to assembling these bitmaps on the video card rather than the way they are currently done? I'm thinking in terms of sending the whole graphics set to the video card, then having it create the game window by assembling those elements. Would it be a lot of work for nothing?

There is a huge performance benefit in having the GPU rather than the CPU do the graphics work, because it's specifically designed and optimized for it. What you're describing, "sending the whole graphics set to the video card then having it create the game window by assembling these elements," is exactly what one typically does when programming 3D, or hardware-accelerated 2D: all of the images are stored in your VRAM as textures, as opposed to in your system's main memory, and an environment like OpenGL is used to tell the card how to display them.

However, here's the thing. There's nothing special about a "bitmap," really. It's just data, 1's and 0's. When it's in your main RAM, it can be manipulated by the CPU just like any other chunk of memory. DSB does a lot of this: it creates temporary images for faster rendering, it composites door windows onto doors and magical windows onto walls, it tiles the blue mist graphic to make teleporters, and, this is the big one, it invokes "subrenderers" of Lua script that get stuck into the main view. The problem being-- none of this is possible if the graphics are locked away in VRAM instead. The GPU can't be programmed in a general purpose way. (Actually, it can, but only if it's a pretty recent one...) The design would have to be fundamentally rethought, and questions would have to be answered that I just don't have the answers to yet.

To be fair, something like OpenGL would simplify some issues: the temporary bitmaps are mainly to do operations like scaling that GL does "for free." The code would still have to be rewritten and debugged, though, and that still takes time, of course. In addition, other things, like the bitmaps generated by Lua, remain sticky and perplexing!

Can you see any things that you would like to be able to do, but can only be done via 3D technology?

Well, of course! Scaling and tinting and stuff would be a lot easier and prettier, and of course, using true 3D allows the possibility of light sources being places other than where the party is standing...

Then, when it is done, the even bigger need would be to find a person like Zyx who is crazy enough to invest a large part of his life in producing a dungeon to fit the beautiful graphics capability. Because without that.....the whole effort is wasted.

Quoted for truth. Without pretty graphics to put into the pretty graphics engine, there's just no point.

[Crash.]

I was crazy to make CSBwin. George was a bit crazy to make RTC. Sophia was a bit crazy to make DSB. Et cetera.

In that case, let me say that I'm very grateful that each of you were crazy enough to devote so much time and energy into your projects, and that you shared your creations that give all of us so much enjoyment.

None of these folks thinks that adding wonderful eye candy would be worth the effort. So the only problem we have is to find some soul who thinks the graphics would make a big difference and is crazy enough to accept the challenge of investing a substantial part of his life in such a project.

Agreed. While I'm discussing hopes and ideas for a DM remake, having this become a reality is an entirely different thing, dependent on a bold volunteer.

Then, when it is done, the even bigger need would be to find a person like Zyx who is crazy enough to invest a large part of his life in producing a dungeon to fit the beautiful graphics capability. Because without that.....the whole effort is wasted.

Part of why I was poking around with the idea of using an existing game system (DSB, RTC, CSBWin) as the logic for a 3D game, is to bring along with it the ability to use existing dungeons, and existing dungeon editors/converters. This would of course only work for generic dungeon graphics and items, and I'm sure trying to create some kind of backward compatibility or converter adds additional levels of complexity.

In short, the idea of a prettier DM is a good idea
and the only question is "Who will do it". So
far we have received several "Not I" responses.

What I wonder about, is that there are a handful of 3D remake projects out there, but as none have made it to completion, have any of the development teams discussed or attempted pooling resources or efforts?

Thanks for your consideration

[Gambit37]

What I wonder about, is that there are a handful of 3D remake projects out there, but as none have made it to completion, have any of the development teams discussed or attempted pooling resources or efforts?

I believe that many people here started off in a group that didn't get very far because it split up when everyone went off to do their own thing...

A project of this magnitude requires a dedicated team, proper leadership, planning, commitment... and time, lots of it. Most of us simply don't have the kind of time needed to devote to something like this. As it is, my own custom work gets maybe 1-2 hours maximum a week devoted to it, some months nothing at all. Sometimes years have gone by when other things have taken my interest. I think it's similar for most other people here.

Us die hards have been on this forum for about 8 years. We still love DM, but I doubt any of us are as enthusiastic about it now as we were when we found this community. Nostalgia is only so powerful.

[Gambit37]

The point being that this needs a new, fresh team who have a real incentive (ie, money, fame, power, new socks, whatever) to develop a new DM.

I respectfully suggest that It won't happen with the few fans here, although I am happy to be proved wrong.

[Crash.]

However, here's the thing. There's nothing special about a "bitmap," really. It's just data, 1's and 0's. When it's in your main RAM, it can be manipulated by the CPU just like any other chunk of memory. The problem being-- none of this is possible if the graphics are locked away in VRAM instead.

A-ha! I knew there had to be a reason. Thanks for clarifying this.

To be fair, something like OpenGL would simplify some issues: the temporary bitmaps are mainly to do operations like scaling that GL does "for free." The code would still have to be rewritten and debugged, though, and that still takes time, of course. In addition, other things, like the bitmaps generated by Lua, remain sticky and perplexing!

So it is also a matter of additional complexity and the need to re-think. and re-write the parts that don't work when moved to the GPU? That does sound like a lot of extra work.

Cheers!