angst@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Angst) (01/24/91)
Saw an ad for this in Jan 1991 Dragon. Has anyone played it in the states, yet? It looks very much like Dungeon Master interface-wise, but slightly more arty (blue marble background rather than plain black). Angst --------------- The Moth: "The cow just .... ate them." The Tick: "Allright !! Bovine intervention !!" ---------------
clarkej@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Jon Clarke) (03/11/91)
Anyone know Eye of the Beholder's release date ? Jon Clarke University of Manchester, UK
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (05/16/91)
[]
I just got Eye of the beholder for the amiga, and it is GREAT.
MUCH better than Dungeon Master or Chaos Strikes back, technically.
It runs fine under 2.0 on the A3000, is HD installable, system
friendly and blows DM away graphically and sonically.
I love the AD&D rules as well. This one is a 10, a real winner.
-Roger
(graphics are 32 colors, and look very good, not quite
as good as the VGA screens but almost, and the sound is
much better than the PC version, it plays quick too!)
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.comcolas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) (05/17/91)
In article <726@digigw.digital.co.jp>, manjit@digigw.digital.co.jp (Manjit Bedi) writes: > Does anyone know when Eye of the Beholder by SSI will be released? > I say they would which claimed it was a new dimension in > RPG or something like that. It is just a copy of dungeon master. Apparently SSI stole the whole game mechanics from FTL, and got good review from the IBM press since they apparently are better known in the IBM world than FTL. I am against copyrights on user-interfaces, but SSI lies makes me sick. The REAL innovators are FTL. Play Dungeon Master and Chaos Strikes Back to see what EoB is. DM & CSB makes full use of the amiga (you can track monsters by listening to stereophonic noises, no disc access, even between levels!!!). Too bad Sundog wasn't ported to the amiga (or was it?). SSI has made really crappy software before, FTL have produced ONLY true masterpieces. I don't mean EoB is crappy, only all good things in it comes from FTL, not SSI. Colas Nahaboo, colas@sa.inria.fr, Bull Research, Koala Project, GWM X11 WM Phone:(33) 93.65.77.70(.66 Fax), INRIA, B.P.109 - 06561 Valbonne Cedex, FRANCE.
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (05/19/91)
[]
>> Colas Nahaboo states that EOB is a clone of DM
Well, it is true that Eye of the Beholder plays a LOT like Dungeon Master
and Chaos Strikes back, but EOB is MUCH MUCH improved, as a program, and
graphically and sonically. But you are quite correct, the innovative
interface is a copy of Dm & CSB.
-Roger
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.comdower@ritcsh.csh.rit.edu (Dower) (05/19/91)
Well, granted it is a DM type ripoff, but admittadly the game was done well. But I encountered a few problems running on a base line A2000. It slows down real nice when you fight big monsters like spiders, also these are cute bugs, did you know that when all your characters get knocked out they can still move... Also if a party member is dying from poison and just happens to get killed by something else before the poison gets to him he still dies from poison. Basically he turns into a dead pile of bones which still feels the effects of poison. And it keeps reminding you it does.... l8r... dower@ritcsh.rit.edu oh, I think they really could have done a better job with the sound, I mean the IBM version w a sound blaster sounds incredible...
root@amber.north.de (Chr. Schlittchen) (05/20/91)
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: >>> Colas Nahaboo states that EOB is a clone of DM >Well, it is true that Eye of the Beholder plays a LOT like Dungeon Master >and Chaos Strikes back, but EOB is MUCH MUCH improved, as a program, and >graphically and sonically. You must be joking. Where are all the little features which make DM/CSB so nice to play ? ( Like the destructable and destructive doors, or the non-standard monsters ( like the black flames )). The graphics weren't improved much, of course the 'backgroud', eg. the dungeon walls are more detailed, but please compare a fireball in DM and EOB. EOB is a rather good game, but it isn't a real classic like DM. -- Christian Schlittchen ( root@amber.north.de / j05j@sie.rz.uni-bremen.de )
maj@silk.Berkeley.EDU (Bilbo Baggins) (05/21/91)
+ 2387 Re: Eye of the Beholder Colas Nahaboo In article <11356@mirsa.inria.fr>, colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) writes: |> In article <726@digigw.digital.co.jp>, manjit@digigw.digital.co.jp (Manjit Bedi) |> writes: |> > Does anyone know when Eye of the Beholder by SSI will be released? |> > I say they would which claimed it was a new dimension in |> > RPG or something like that. |> |> It is just a copy of dungeon master. Apparently SSI stole the whole game |> mechanics from FTL, and got good review from the IBM press since they apparently |> are better known in the IBM world than FTL. I am against copyrights on |> user-interfaces, but SSI lies makes me sick. |> |> The REAL innovators are FTL. Play Dungeon Master and Chaos Strikes Back to see |> what EoB is. DM & CSB makes full use of the amiga (you can track monsters by |> listening to stereophonic noises, no disc access, even between levels!!!). Too |> bad Sundog wasn't ported to the amiga (or was it?). SSI has made really crappy |> software before, FTL have produced ONLY true masterpieces. |> |> I don't mean EoB is crappy, only all good things in it comes from FTL, not SSI. |> |> Colas Nahaboo, colas@sa.inria.fr, Bull Research, Koala Project, GWM X11 WM |> Phone:(33) 93.65.77.70(.66 Fax), INRIA, B.P.109 - 06561 Valbonne Cedex, FRANCE. I have to differ with you here, SSI and EA are the true Inovators here because they are the only ones who have the guts to take a system improve it and PORT it to different machines, something the asses at FTL have not. And the only way you can say that SSI has only produced crappy stuff is if you only have an amiga and you keep your head stuck in the sand. Back when FTL and amiga both were dreams SSI was writing some of the best and most original RPG's around. If you don't like SSI's way of creating Eye of the Beholder, then that's fine, but when you say its a copy, you are dead wrong. I remember playing Dungeon Master on a friends amiga, yes I have a PC and therefore can't get DM, and I remember how it was complicated, and how that you consumed food too fast, as well as other problems. I agree that the visual display in Eye of the Beholder is very similar , but I would not say that it is a copy of Dungeon Master. PS. Let us take a look at great games that each company has produced SSI: PHANTASIE Wizards Crown Pool of Radiance Eye Of The Beholder (as well as all of their sequel's to each of the above" The first two both won awards for being the best rpg in the year they were released. Note Also that All of these games except for the last, has been ported to just about every machine. FTL: DUNGEON MASTER (If ther is anything else that FTL has made that worth crap please let me know, and Don't list Chaos Strikes Back because that requires the DM game as well) Note here that the morons at FTL, who by the way make me sick, have never bothered to port it to the IBM machines. _____________________________________________________________________________ OOO O O One ring to rule them all, One ring to find them O O One ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. OOO - Insciption found on the One Ring of Power ingr!b17a!silk!maj@uunet.uu.net
rblewitt@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Richard Blewitt) (05/21/91)
In article <1991May20.195524.22828@b17a.ingr.com> maj@silk.Berkeley.EDU (Bilbo Baggins) writes: > Note here that the morons at FTL, who by the way make me sick, > have never bothered to port it to the IBM machines. My guess is that that is because IBM machines make them sick :) This is a common reaction to IBM's. Rick _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________.sig____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ The generic .sig Rick Blewitt rblewitt@ucsd.edu
tagreen@lothario.ucs.indiana.edu (Todd Green) (05/21/91)
I'm sorry but you truly deserve this flame. >it to different machines, something the asses at FTL have not. And the only >way you can say that SSI has only produced crappy stuff is if you only have an FTL has produced Amiga, Atart ST, and Apple IIGS versions of DM (Perhaps more but these are the ones that I'm aware of). So that pretty much disproves your argument about porting. I called them asking about a Mac version and they said that they were thinking about it but currently a IBM port was in the works. > (If ther is anything else that FTL has made that worth crap please > let me know, and Don't list Chaos Strikes Back because that > requires the DM game as well) Not only are you arrogant, you are ignorant. FTL also makes a well programmed game called OIDS. It is one of the best games for the Mac as far as animation and scrolling go, IMHO. Also CSB does _not_ require DM. The package labeling was done on the first shipment of boxes before they decided to not require the first game. (Roughly paraphrased from a FTL employee). > Note here that the morons at FTL, who by the way make me sick, > have never bothered to port it to the IBM machines. As I said before, they are working on the port right now, but you since you hate them so much, why are you even interested in their products? Methinks there is a bit of jealousy raging in your body. Since I have not seen EOB, I cannot comment on it, though I will look forward to seeing/playing it. In the future it would be nice if you thought about what you are going to post. Calling the people from FTL morons and asses is highly uncalled for, IMO. Have you ever spoken to anyone from FTL? I've talked to various members and have found all of them to be very cherry, bright, and they have a great sense of humor. Remember that these are _real_ people you are talking about. People have feelings, don't you think it would be nice to respect them? Todd -- Internet: tagreen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu NeXTMail: tagreen@lothario.ucs.indiana.edu BitNet: tagreen@iubacs.bitnet
freund@sakura.ucdavis.edu (Jason Freund) (05/21/91)
In article <1991May16.093613.1802@crash.cts.com> uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: >[] >I just got Eye of the beholder for the amiga, and it is GREAT. >MUCH better than Dungeon Master or Chaos Strikes back, technically. >It runs fine under 2.0 on the A3000, is HD installable, system >friendly and blows DM away graphically and sonically. >I love the AD&D rules as well. This one is a 10, a real winner. > >-Roger >(graphics are 32 colors, and look very good, not quite >as good as the VGA screens but almost, and the sound is >much better than the PC version, it plays quick too!) I don't mean to be argumentative, but I don't think that EOB is much better than CSB/DM. I still like CSB/DM better. * It's extremely slow on my plain old 500 -- combat is almost unbearably slow sometimes. * 32 colors is nice, but walls far away look really bad because up close they used lots of greys, and didn't save enough colors for walls further away. * The monotony of the walls is pretty bad. In DM, it didn't bother me since you could hardly tell that most plain walls are the same, but in EOB, their irregular brick pattern makes the fact that there is only ONE wall painfully obvios when you step back a square or two and see symmetrical patterns at wall seams. * The sound effects aren't as good -- all are very short, unlike DM -- and many are probably computer generated. Stereo sound for the monsters made DM far superior sound-wise. * Auto-mapping features of CSB makes EOB take a seat. * Most importantly, EOB dissapointed me because it was so easy. DM took me several months; EOB took several days. The puzzles in EOB were all almost trivial or painfull (like the one on the beholders level where taking an object off a pillar would draw an object from your inventory to replace it forcing you to drop everything). Overall, EOB is one of my favorite games. I was drawn into it almost as much as DM/CSB. I hope they continue the series and make them more difficult -- there were many aspects of EOB I liked better than DM that make me look forward to future installments. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jason Freund freund@sakura.ucdavis.edu // 1420 Lake Blvd #14 916-753-8677 // Amiga 3000 Davis, CA 95616 Computer Science, Engineering \\ // --------------------------------------------------------------\X/-------------- while (!deadyet) { Getup(); Gotowork(); }
hotline@dorsai.com (Anthony Palestrini) (05/21/91)
Whats the difference between 1.0 and 3.0? I ordered it and I've recieved v1.0 now I hear there is a 3.0? Anyone have it? Whats the difference? This game is a definate must get, Puts Dungeon Master to shame. REALLY Nice.
avatar@MAPLE.CIRCA.UFL.EDU (05/21/91)
And, just to shed a bit of perspective on the subject, SSI is very bad about porting programs to the Amiga. It took half a year for Champions of Krynn to be ported, even longer for Curse of the Azure Bonds. Even worse, Death Knights of Krynn and Secret of the Silver Blades have STILL not be en taken care of. I think it's high time someone neglected the I*M. One knows the situation is truly bad when programs hit the Commode 64 before the Amiga. AVATAR@maple.circa.ufl.edu
colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) (05/22/91)
In article <1991May20.195524.22828@b17a.ingr.com>, maj@silk.Berkeley.EDU (Bilbo Baggins) writes: > And the only > way you can say that SSI has only produced crappy stuff I did not say ALL they have done was bad, but that they have let people buy real pieces of shit in the past. It is a company you CANNOT trust your money in, you have to evaluate first. In the case of EOB, they made a good job. Did you try to dissassemble the wargames on the Apple II ? horrible basic code, not even compiled! FTL's Sundog was a true masterpiece on the AppleII, and more over on the Atari ST. Too bad it wasn't ported to the amiga (or was it?) DM took 3 years to come out after I first heard of it. the took I think 1 YEAR in beta test. Now this is some user-respecting company! > amiga and you keep your head stuck in the sand. Back when FTL and amiga both > were dreams SSI was writing some of the best and most original RPG's around. Utter bullshit. SSI quality has really improved in time. > PS. Let us take a look at great games that each company has produced > > SSI: PHANTASIE > Wizards Crown > Pool of Radiance copy of wizardry > Eye Of The Beholder copy of DM > FTL: DUNGEON MASTER unprecedented + sundog, unprecedented too. (oids wasn't an original game concept) better one good game than a pile of shit! > Note here that the morons at FTL, who by the way make me sick, > have never bothered to port it to the IBM machines. Well, for me it is a proof that they have more taste than greed :-).
judd@wilkinson.Colorado.EDU (Mr. Integral) (05/22/91)
In article <1991May20.195524.22828@b17a.ingr.com> maj@silk.Berkeley.EDU (Bilbo Baggins) writes: >|> It is just a copy of dungeon master. Apparently SSI stole the whole game >|> mechanics from FTL, and got good review from the IBM press since they apparently >|> are better known in the IBM world than FTL. I am against copyrights on >|> user-interfaces, but SSI lies makes me sick. >|> >|> The REAL innovators are FTL. Play Dungeon Master and Chaos Strikes Back to see >|> what EoB is. DM & CSB makes full use of the amiga (you can track monsters by >|> listening to stereophonic noises, no disc access, even between levels!!!). Too >|> bad Sundog wasn't ported to the amiga (or was it?). SSI has made really crappy >|> software before, FTL have produced ONLY true masterpieces. >|> >|> I don't mean EoB is crappy, only all good things in it comes from FTL, not SSI. >|> >|> Colas Nahaboo, colas@sa.inria.fr, Bull Research, Koala Project, GWM X11 WM >|> Phone:(33) 93.65.77.70(.66 Fax), INRIA, B.P.109 - 06561 Valbonne Cedex, FRANCE. > >I have to differ with you here, SSI and EA are the true Inovators here because >they are the only ones who have the guts to take a system improve it and PORT This is an advantage? Porting is the key reason I buy so few games on the Amiga. Looking at animation IBM-style is not my idea of a good time. Same goes for sounds, interface (hires pointer, etc), can I put it on my HD, did they port it or does it actually Multitask, etc. Second, in the first sentence you reference SSI as 'innovators' and yet three words later state that they merely take an already existant system and simply modify it. Certainly not innovative. >it to different machines, something the asses at FTL have not. And the only So, you're mad at FTL because your computer didn't quite have the capabilities to handle the program? Or just upset that they didn't make a version for your copmuter. Strange to hear that from a non-Amiga user... >way you can say that SSI has only produced crappy stuff is if you only have an >amiga and you keep your head stuck in the sand. Back when FTL and amiga both >were dreams SSI was writing some of the best and most original RPG's around. BzzzzZZZZZzzzztt. Let's extend this to all of SSI's programs, of which I played quite a few on my C-64. Graphics and sound were invariably pathetic, the games themselves were often not particularly interesting (most of the wargames were the SAME GAME, just with different terrain and unit stats), and far overpriced. I will leave your 'most original' comment for another paragraph. >If you don't like SSI's way of creating Eye of the Beholder, then that's fine, >but when you say its a copy, you are dead wrong. I remember playing Dungeon Master >on a friends amiga, yes I have a PC and therefore can't get DM, and I remember >how it was complicated, and how that you consumed food too fast, as well as other MoooommMMMMIIIIIEEEEEE! You, you mean, a game where you actually had to apply a modicum of INTELLIGENCE?!?!? Aw, that is kinda rough. Where does the food comment come from? I never ran out of food. Finally, what are these mysterious 'other problems' you mention? The fact that it doesn't multitask and that I can't put it on my HD? You are right, those are problems, albeit minor ones for that particular program. >problems. I agree that the visual display in Eye of the Beholder is very similar >, but I would not say that it is a copy of Dungeon Master. Enhanced graphics and changed (pronounced "change-ed") plot doth not an original make. It is a copy. An improved copy, perhaps, but a copy. > >PS. Let us take a look at great games that each company has produced > > SSI: PHANTASIE A quaint game, I am fond of it and played it on my 64. However, it was compiled basic, hurtin graphics, hurtin sound. I like it though, and would even call it original, for the most part. > Wizards Crown Never played it. Never looked too interesting. > Pool of Radiance Never played it. Always looked quite similar to Bards Tale, (which, I might add, looks quite similar to Wizardry), although combat looked different. Also looked like an IBM port. > Eye Of The Beholder A copy of Dungeon Master, and from what I've been reading, not complex at all, albeit very pretty to look at. > (as well as all of their sequel's to each of the above" Ooooh, you mean Phantasie II and III, those incredibly boring games? Since I never played/saw any of the others, I will not comment. And let's not forget Questron, that neat game (no sarcasm there) whose interface was liscensed from the Ultima folks (probably Sierra On-Line at that time?), and Questron II, yet another game from the same guys that brought us that neat looking but quite trite game, Legacy of the Ancients. > > The first two both won awards for being the best rpg in the year > they were released. Note Also that All of these games except for > the last, has been ported to just about every machine. Big Deal(tm). Hero's Quest was in the number one spot for several weeks, yet was laughed out of the Amiga market. The point being, for those who as yet have not grasped it, is that just because everyone else buys a game, movie, computer, book, etc., does not mean that it is a good/ original/quality item. Usually portability detracts from a game, since the designers generally bow to the lowest contender, usually an IBM. You don't see The Killing Game Show on other platforms, do you? Does this make it a bad game? > > FTL: DUNGEON MASTER > > (If ther is anything else that FTL has made that worth crap please > let me know, and Don't list Chaos Strikes Back because that > requires the DM game as well) CSB does not require DM. You can always borrow the DM instruction manual from someone, or have someone explain the rules to you. Incidentally, what does this have to do with whether or not CSB is "worth crap?" Nothing? > > Note here that the morons at FTL, who by the way make me sick, > have never bothered to port it to the IBM machines. Use your brain for a second here. Why do you suppose that is? Expense? Compuer requirements? Quite frankly, I don't know why. Maybe they are actually men of vision, who realize where the future is in machines? If you find out why, I would be curious to know. Also, how did the people at FTL earn the classification 'morons,' and why do they make you sick? Simple inflamed rhetoric, perhaps? This is really about Eye of the Beholder, and SSI's products. I remember a sudden shift in game design right after Summer Games came out. Most games were being designed with good graphics, sound, etc. Unfortunately, they began to depend on this for the game. Before this time, almost every game you saw was 1)original, and 2)fun, otherwise the programmer would not earn any money. After this there was a marked decrease in original, fun games, and a marked increase in ripoffs with enhanced sound and graphics and such. You may draw the analogy to SSI and specifically Eye of the Beholder at your leisure. With a few exceptions, I have never, ever, found the ripoff to be nearly as good as the "ripee," (assuming the "ripee" was any good in the first place). This is the Nintendo mentality. "Hey, this game sells, let's change things around a little, and sell another two million copies." Too bad. > ingr!b17a!silk!maj@uunet.uu.net -Steve -- judd@sgt-york.lanl.gov // You gotta get in to get out. ...!ncar!boulder!tramp!judd \X/ -Genesis
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (05/22/91)
colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) writes: [About EOB] >It is just a copy of dungeon master. Apparently SSI stole the whole game >mechanics from FTL, and got good review from the IBM press since they >apparently are better known in the IBM world than FTL. I am against >copyrights on user-interfaces, but SSI lies makes me sick. What a bunch of crap. They stole the user interface from FTL? Not bloody likely - if you're going that direction, then FTL stole their user interface from Wizardry. DM was good, but hardly a "masterpiece". -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (05/22/91)
avatar@MAPLE.CIRCA.UFL.EDU writes: >And, just to shed a bit of perspective on the subject, SSI is very bad >about porting programs to the Amiga. It took half a year for Champions of >Krynn to be ported, even longer for Curse of the Azure Bonds. Even worse, >Death Knights of Krynn and Secret of the Silver Blades have STILL not be >en taken care of. This should get better, now that SSI is doing their ports internally, instead of relying on outside contractors to do 'em. Notice that the Amiga and IBM versions of Buck Rogers came out almost simultaneously. -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (05/22/91)
[]
EOB installs on a hard disk, is 2.0X compatible and runs just fine on
the A3000. This makes it a MUCH better program, technically in my
nbook than DM or CSB (DM does not work on the A3000, I don't think,
and CSB is not 2.0X compatible last I checked, in either case they
run only off of floppies).
CSB and DM are much bigger games, and better adventures overall, since
EOB is so short. But I love the rules in Eye and I prefer the graphics
in Eye as well.
-Roger
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.comcolas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) (05/23/91)
In article <24948@well.sf.ca.us>, farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) writes: > [About EOB] > >It is just a copy of dungeon master. > What a bunch of crap. They stole the user interface from FTL? Not bloody > likely - if you're going that direction, then FTL stole their user interface > from Wizardry. DM was good, but hardly a "masterpiece". DM closer to wizardy than EOB ? Come on, don't drink and post, Mike :-)
tinny@madnix.UUCP (Philip Varner) (05/26/91)
Eye Of The Beholder IS A COPY od Dungeon Master, right down to displaying the body where items are carried! Good Game, but if there was a law prohibiting copying the user interfaces, EoB would have been sued and beaten in an instant.
--
UUCP: {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!tinny
{decvax|att}!caw@miroc.Chi.IL.US (Christopher A. Wichura) (05/26/91)
After reading all the good comments about Eye of the Beholder for the Amiga, I figured I'd try it out myself. When I saw that it was Westwood Associates that did the programming, I was somewhat relieved, as they have done some other quality work on the Amiga (such as the Chessmaster 2100 port). Implementation impressions are quite favorable. The graphics are really quite good, and the sound isn't too shabby either. The game runs fine on my A3000 with 10 megs of RAM (someone on the net said that they had to use NoFastMem, I did not have to do this, although I am a developer so it may be related to the version of kickstart I have). I do agree with the comment made earlier that using Extra Halfbrite Mode could have added a little more touch to the graphics. My only real gripes about the implementation is: they busy wait on the keyboard and, secondly, they CloseWorkbench() without checking to see if they really need the little bit of memory they gey back from that. So while one can multitask, and Amiga-N/M seem to work fine, you have no Workbench screen. Obviously, in my case, there is no need to close down Workbench... Aaarrrgghhh! As a game, I have not spent a huge amount of time on it yet. But the controls are very simple, and easily mastered in a few minutes. Running through the first level of the game is quite easy. I've only just started playing the second level, where one actually starts to stumble onto traps. Many have said that the game is pretty easy on the whole. Looking at it quickly, I do get this impression. But it also looks like it will be a lot of fun to go though. Overall, I'm really pretty pleased with this game. SSI has, in my opinion, not done the greatest Amiga ports in the past. Even recent games like Buck Rogers I turned down because it was obvious that certain areas were using software based timing. If SSI keeps up with the current trend, they could have some pretty good Amiga software. Fix the quirks I mentioned about (and nuke the blasted SAS/C stdio window...) and they'll be doing great. I guess the one other thing I observed that I found a little irksome (though it is so minor I really ought not to even mention it) is that they used two seperate amiga fonts, eobf6 and eobf8. Why they didn't just combine the two into a single font with 6 and 8 point sizes is beyond me. BTW, the HD Install program actually did things in a fairly intelligent manner. Too many games I've seen have simply done a copy df0:* all to games:<dir>, which would boat along many files not needed (such as Disk.info). Christopher A. Wichura Multitasking. Just DO it. caw@miroc.chi.il.us (my amiga) ...the Amiga way... u12401@uicvm.uic.edu (school account)
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (05/26/91)
colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) writes: >In article <24948@well.sf.ca.us>, farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) writes: >> [About EOB] >> >It is just a copy of dungeon master. >> What a bunch of crap. They stole the user interface from FTL? Not bloody >> likely - if you're going that direction, then FTL stole their user interface >> from Wizardry. DM was good, but hardly a "masterpiece". >DM closer to wizardy than EOB ? >Come on, don't drink and post, Mike :-) Well, I don't shee why I shouldn't, thish late at night :-) I didn't say that DM was closer to Wizardry than it was to EOB. I said that BOTH of those games derive their basic operation from Wizardry (or, possibly, something even before that - Wizardry was the first D&D type game I played, some ten years ago). There isn't all that much that's unique about the DM user interface. I admit, there's a lot more detail implemented in the game itself, but I've seen every single concept used in DM long before, in one game or another. DM is a fine game, no doubt about it (except for the damn copy protection, which makes it impossible for me to put onto my hard drive - the version I've got will NOT work with the PD hacks). But it isn't a work of genius, it isn't a masterpiece. -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (05/27/91)
[]
Actually Wizardry is a clone of the mainframe CDC PLATO computer
game called Avatar, which was taken from Oubliette, another PLATO
game. They were GREAT, I used to play them in college in the
early 80's.
-Roger
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.comquasar@bellcore.com (Laurence Brothers) (05/28/91)
I too have just bought the game.
The actual programming seems to have been done moderately well.
But there is a major problem with the game (I've done the first three
levels so far with no sweat). This problem is actually endemic to
the whole style of game.
Basically, the game is far too tediously the same from place to place.
Most games with perspective view share the problem of having all
walls look basically the same. If you have to stop to map, you lose
all the feeling (such as it is) of actually being in the little
world of the game.
Some other games have workarounds to this problem. For example:
* Dungeon Master (version 1, anyhow) has a simple enough dungeon layout
so you don't have to map, and can actually remember where things are.
* Bane of the Cosmic Forge has more variety from place to place, so it is
somewhat easier to remember where you are and what the map looks like. Also,
their perspective view seems to hold more in it, perhaps because it is
mostly not in little dungeon corridors which block line-of-sight.
* DragonWars provides an automapper.
And various games without automapper provide birds-eye views in various
other ways. All these solutions are unsatisfactory from one perspective
or another, but at least they're attempts....
Anyhow, Beholder's corridors and rooms all look pretty much the same,
and (on the first few levels at least) the map layout isn't unique
enough from place to place to make it reasonably possible to remember
where you are without referring to a map.
Thankfully, they've actually provided almost-correct maps of the first three
levels, but subsequent levels will be a real pain with graph paper and
almost impossible without.
Another thing about the first three levels is they are all like bad D&D
-- hack and slash, with the only puzzle solving being disarming traps
and opening doors, and no actual plot-line or "role-play" (so-called) at
all. Who wants to spend hours clicking on the "kill" button, without
even any arcade action?
--
Laurence R. Brothers (quasar@bellcore.com)
"There is no memory with less satisfaction in it than the memory
of some temptation we resisted." -- James Branch Cabellcaw@miroc.Chi.IL.US (Christopher A. Wichura) (05/29/91)
In article <1991May28.122956@bellcore.com> quasar@bellcore.com (Laurence Brothers) writes: [...] > >Anyhow, Beholder's corridors and rooms all look pretty much the same, >and (on the first few levels at least) the map layout isn't unique >enough from place to place to make it reasonably possible to remember >where you are without referring to a map. Hmm. I found that pretty soon I was walking around levels one and two without even having to look at the maps supplied with the game. Level 3 I halfway know as well. I've gotten down to level five so far. At level four the graphics for the walls change to a grey/white stone texture. Still, in my wanderings I have gotten somewhat used to the layout of these levels without really having to map. >Thankfully, they've actually provided almost-correct maps of the first three >levels, but subsequent levels will be a real pain with graph paper and >almost impossible without. The maps are not entirely correct, as you mentioned. They also leave out several hidden places as well. As for the pain of mapping, see my feelings above. >Another thing about the first three levels is they are all like bad D&D >-- hack and slash, with the only puzzle solving being disarming traps >and opening doors, and no actual plot-line or "role-play" (so-called) at >all. Who wants to spend hours clicking on the "kill" button, without >even any arcade action? Actually, it seems to me the hack and slash in EOB is much less that games like the Bard's Tale series where you move two spaces and you've gotta fight, move another two and fight ad infinitem. In EOB you can avoid quite a few encounters. As for the plot line stuff, it is true that the first three levels aren't real stong on that. However, starting on level four, and then more particularily on level five, you do start to see some plot development. As I haven't gotten futher yet, I can't say about the lower levels. -=> CAW Christopher A. Wichura Multitasking. Just DO it. caw@miroc.chi.il.us (my amiga) ...the Amiga way... u12401@uicvm.uic.edu (school account)
hotline@dorsai (Anthony Palestrini) (05/30/91)
colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) writes: > In article <726@digigw.digital.co.jp>, manjit@digigw.digital.co.jp (Manjit Be > writes: > > Does anyone know when Eye of the Beholder by SSI will be released? > > I say they would which claimed it was a new dimension in > > RPG or something like that. > > It is just a copy of dungeon master. Apparently SSI stole the whole game > mechanics from FTL, and got good review from the IBM press since they apparen > are better known in the IBM world than FTL. I am against copyrights on > user-interfaces, but SSI lies makes me sick. > > The REAL innovators are FTL. Play Dungeon Master and Chaos Strikes Back to se > what EoB is. DM & CSB makes full use of the amiga (you can track monsters by > listening to stereophonic noises, no disc access, even between levels!!!). To > bad Sundog wasn't ported to the amiga (or was it?). SSI has made really crapp > software before, FTL have produced ONLY true masterpieces. > > I don't mean EoB is crappy, only all good things in it comes from FTL, not SS > > Colas Nahaboo, colas@sa.inria.fr, Bull Research, Koala Project, GWM X11 WM > Phone:(33) 93.65.77.70(.66 Fax), INRIA, B.P.109 - 06561 Valbonne Cedex, FRANC Ahem. You are truely wrong there, FTL only make 2 of these such masterpieces. SSI has many many many masterpieces, such as their AD&D Interfaces (Pool Of Radiance, Curse Of The Azure Bonds,etc.) Not to mention their war games and simulations. (Dragonstrike!, Renegade Legion Interceptor,etc..) Now I'm not putting down FTL, I finished both DM and CSB and loved both, but they are now no longer up the standards. Both DM and CSB lacked different backgrounds, friendly people, NPCs, talking,etc. EOB included all that plus many new features (the Inventory screen is much neater, and you can walk around while in the inventory screen!), the spell system is alot easier than all those runes (though you get used to them but they are hard to learn at first), plus alot more things. Dont put down SSI because it happens to be a great company! As for the IBM version of EOB, I think the amiga kicks it away! s
angst@cs.uq.oz.au (Andrew Moran) (05/31/91)
Neat game, just as scary as DM (more so in some parts). I've done the first three levels (really easy) but I've only found one special quest. MINOR SPOILER: On the 2nd level, there are dagger carvings all over the place. Once you've put a dagger in all these, you get the message "Special Quest for level two". Is there a special quest for level one? Level three? Andrew "Hire you a horse? For ninepence? On Jewish New Year's Eve in the rain? A bare fortnight after the dreaded horse plague of Old London Town? With the blacksmith's strike in its fifteenth week and the Dorset Horse-Fetishists fair tomorrow?" -- Baldrick, dogsbody to the butler to the Prince Regent.
m0030@tnc.UUCP (FRANK MCPHERSON) (06/01/91)
In article <1849@madnix.UUCP> tinny@madnix.UUCP (Philip Varner) writes: > > Eye Of The Beholder IS A COPY od Dungeon Master, right down to displaying the body where items are carried! Good Game, but if there was a law prohibiting copying the user interfaces, EoB would have been sued and beaten in an instant. > >-- >UUCP: {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!tinny > {decvax|att}! There is a copyright on look and feel. However, I don't think Eye of the Beholder will have a problem with that. It's similar to Dungeon Master, and does seem to have taken some inspiration from it, but if you really want to get picky about the user interfaces, wizardry I is the first game I remember to have a 3-d type interface. The graphics weren't nearly as good as those of DM, CSB and EOB, but the idea was there.... - emcphers@manu.cs.vt.edu
hotline@dorsai (Anthony Palestrini) (06/03/91)
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) writes: > colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) writes: > > [About EOB] > >It is just a copy of dungeon master. Apparently SSI stole the whole game > >mechanics from FTL, and got good review from the IBM press since they > >apparently are better known in the IBM world than FTL. I am against > >copyrights on user-interfaces, but SSI lies makes me sick. > > What a bunch of crap. They stole the user interface from FTL? Not bloody > likely - if you're going that direction, then FTL stole their user interface > from Wizardry. DM was good, but hardly a "masterpiece". > > -- > Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us If your going to pull it as far back as Wizardry about the inferface, then why not suggest Bloodwych? which has the same interface (almost) except you can play with 2 people at the same time just like dungeon master, EOB, wizardry. (I'm not sure when it was released, but i know for sure it was before Dungeon Master). Dont get me wrong, I love Dungeon Master and EOB. I see no reason to argue over it, EOB is much better. Dungeon Master was a game beyond its day, great graphics, great sounds, memory resident,etc. But EOB brought it up a bit more, as I posted before. Like the screens are neater, you can walk around while in inventory, more ITEMS!, rules, etc. Also.. Here is a list of helpful items if you know how to use a sector editor for EOB : 0143, 0136, 008d, 009e, 0178, 0056, 0081 (Stone Objects) 013a, 0128, 0126, 015d, 015e, 00ab, 00ce, 008c (Many helpful items, Included : Plate mail, Ring of Feather Falling, Drow Shield & Boots, Longsword +5, Drow Cleaver, Ring Of Protection +3, Helmet, Dwarven Shield) Have fun! If they come in handy let me, took me a while to figure this stuff out.
karl@prophet.UUCP (Karl-Gunnar Hultland) (06/03/91)
>In article <824@tnc.UUCP> m0030@tnc.UUCP (FRANK MCPHERSON) writes: >In article <1849@madnix.UUCP> tinny@madnix.UUCP (Philip Varner) writes: >> >> Eye Of The Beholder IS A COPY od Dungeon Master, right down to displaying the body where items are carried! Good Game, but if there was a law prohibiting copying the user interfaces, EoB would have been sued and beaten in an instant. >> >>-- >>UUCP: {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!tinny >> {decvax|att}! > > > >There is a copyright on look and feel. However, I don't think Eye of >the Beholder will have a problem with that. It's similar to Dungeon >Master, and does seem to have taken some inspiration from it, but if >you really want to get picky about the user interfaces, wizardry I is >the first game I remember to have a 3-d type interface. The graphics >weren't nearly as good as those of DM, CSB and EOB, but the idea was >there.... > >- emcphers@manu.cs.vt.edu Alternate Reality also had a 3d interface. Karl PS Does anyone know what happened to the company which made Alternate Reality?? If they are dead is there any chance someone could release the source in PD? It's wery annoying getting those Please insert ... disk messages without them beeing released. --- Karl Hultland, {rutgers | pyramid | uunet}!cmbvax!cbmehq!cbmswe!prophet!karl Organization: Mine all mine. Egoist: a person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me. - A. Bierce
colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) (06/06/91)
In article <95sX31w163w@dorsai>, hotline@dorsai (Anthony Palestrini) writes: > If your going to pull it as far back as Wizardry about the inferface, > then why not suggest Bloodwych? (I'm not sure when it was released, but i > know > for sure it was before Dungeon Master). Dead wrong! Bloodwych was the first DM clone, perhaps one year after it at least. (don't forget DM was out for the ST well before the amiga version...). PS: to various people: there is a lot more to the DM interface than just the 3-D view of the maze, it is what is called "direct manipulation". Try to make a good user interface once, then you'll be able to appreciate the sheer beauty of DM's "engine". You know, really good people can make extremely hard feats look easy and effortless... PPS: If you want to be convinced that SSI CAN release low quality software, try their latest, called (I think) return of the death knights of krynn... EOB high quality was SSI exception, not the rule!
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (06/07/91)
[
Death Knights of Krynn is not out for the Amiga yet. I have played
Champions of Krynn, Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds and
EOB. I found EOB to be better graphically, but not near as much fin
(fun) a game as the others. I really enjoyed ALL of their AD&D series,
certainly the others have a lot more 'meat' to them, in more storyline
and adventure.
-Roger
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.comgor@cs.strath.ac.uk (Gordon Russell) (06/28/91)
Hi all you gamers.... Is anyone out there playing "Eye of the Beholder"? I am getting completely slaughtered on level 4 (the spider level). Can anyone help me out? The situation is this. Every time I enter the spider area and clear a room, returning to the room results in about 5 spiders appearing (which seems to kill me off quite quickly). Whats the best way to do this level? During the first attempt to map the level, I found that the long corridor on the east side of the map (within the spider area), had an corridor with two potions of cure poison in it. This whole passageway arrangement, which runs north to south appeared to wrap round, but every other time I have played this level I could not find the potions (one of the passageways on my map which lead to the potions is now a dead end), and the corridor did not wrap round. There is an arch in this level, with pictures of equipment around it. Anyone got this to do anything. There is a room marked "oracle" with an alcove. What is this thing about? There are two switches in the level which seem to do very little. WHat is the short chain for in the wall? There is also a statue in the wall which can be activated, but does not effect the passageway with the pits in it. What are these switches for! I am at my wits end....Please Please Help!!! Gordon Russell