hastoerm@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Moriland) (02/26/91)
In article <2370@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> rwkay@cs.hw.ac.uk (R.W.Kay) writes: }-- }Hello, } } Here is a message from Dave Jones, author of Amiga Lemmings, he has no }direct usenet access but can read from the net. So I'm posting this on }his behalf, any comments or mail will be forwarded to him. } }Russell } }---------------------------------------------------------- First, let me just say that it's nice to hear from the author of Amiga Lemmings. It's nice to know someone is listening even if it doesn't change anything right away. } }I have been reading the Lemmings talk with interest and I would like }to offer my opinions. These are the opinions of DMA Design, & not }Psygnosis. Remember we are developers, not publishers. }Branding a game because it is PUBLISHED by a particular company, is }akin to not buying records pressed by WEA or CBS!, i.e. taking no }account of the performer. } }First of all the reasons for making lemmings a copy protected disk. }To most users this is transparent. Copy protection simply requires }the reading of a single track, only once, as the game is loaded. If }we did not tell users the disk is protected, and they did not try }to copy it, there is absolutely no way to tell it is protected. }The disk routines themselves are fast, reliable, do NOT grind the }heads etc. We step the heads as quickly as they will go within }the CBM guidelines. ALL disk loads are buffered to RAM, this means }after playing the game for a while, very few disk accesses are ever }required (none with 1 MEG of expansion). Two drives are supported. }To those people who will NOT buy the game, because they are used to }other types of protection (I too dislike bad programming that causes }the heads to step non-stop at slow rates) are simply cutting of their }noses to spite their face. }Why not try the game, you will find NO problems with the loading, it }is quick & quiet. Remember other developers wrote other Psygnosis }games, we did not write Beast or Awesome. I have tried the game at a friend's house who bought it because he doesn't really care either way and I must admit, the protection routines are some of the best and most transparent I have encountered. } }We KNOW it does not stop the pirates. But you think we should give in? }Just release unprotected disks? Let every Tom, Dick or Harry copy the }disk with 'diskcopy df0: to df1:' }We HAVE to stop casual copying. This is the killer. If a young kid buys }a game and can very simply copy the disk for his friend, then we are }in big trouble. Protected disks are the only way to stop this. I know }pirates will always rip the protection out in a day or, but the way }we look at it is that pirates, and the people they swap with, would }never buy the games anyway. I have never said that I am totally against protection. I understand the reasoning behind it and I have to grudgingly except that this is an imperfect world. My main objection was lack of HD support. You can support an HD and still have protection. Manual Keyword lookup is one way. The Immortal, which was written on the Amiga, supports this method, and it even lets you play the first level before it kicks in. It uses several codes looked up by finding a matching picture in the manual. It only comes up once during the game and is, at worst, a minor annoyance. (It comes up between first and second levels, or immediately before restoring a game so as least to disrupt play) I would even accept a key disk method if it allowed me to put the game on the HD. } } }HD Installation? } }Right, to install on HD requires the operating system to be intact. }The operating system want 100K of CHIP RAM minimum. } }We write our games to utitilise ALL the memory. }We write our disk routines to be fast. } }100K of CHIP is a serious amount of memory to lose. Remember the Amiga }is heavily dependant on CHIP RAM. Some users have > then 1/2 MEG of }chip RAM, but they are at the moment a minority. To make the game }HD installable would require us to use AmigaDOS on floppy. This }is seriously slower then our routines. We lose about 100K of disk }space (we squeeze 980K from a disk). This means more comprimises. }Basically if we make these sacrifices the majority of users (A500 }owners with an extra floppy) lose out, just to please the guys with }hard drives. } }Remember we are in this for a living. In Europe the typical setup }for 90% of Amiga owners is an A500 + Extra Drive. } }We have deadlines to meet, we have other versions to write. To make }every version use full OS of all the machines we are using will take }a lot of time. Every owner of every machine wants a game to make use }of all the hardware they have. Where do we draw the line? } }Extra memory? Supported }Extra drives? Supported } }HD installable, do you REALLY need it. You want your HD being filled }with games? You sit down to play a game when you have time, or are in the }mood. No doubt some games NEED a HD (Cinemaware for example), but }Lemmings does not NEED the benefits of an HD. I use Amiga's all the time, }if I want to play a game I can live with it taking 1 minute to load rather }than 10 secs. Remember to look at games individually here. Lemmings has }overcome all the gripes we get (apart from HD) so I dont understand people }saying they will never buy another game that is protected. 'Protected' is }far too global a word. Need? Does anyone really need to play games to begin with? Not really. No major loss if you don't. It's for the enjoyment that we play, right? My enjoyment is increased if I can load it in off of my HD at a faster speed than any floppy routine can hope for. I commend you on finally realizing that more and more Amiga owners have more than 512K and one floppy. In many instances that can make up for lack of HD support. (My BIGGEST gripe is having to swap disks on my 3 Floppy, one HD system because someone doesn't know how to recognize more than one floppy at a time.) Your arguments for lack of HD support are valid and reasonable to me on the grounds of loss of memory and disk space only. I can see saying "We would have put in HD support, but to squeeze in the extra levels, we just didn't have the room on one or two (etc) floppies." I can not agree with "We didn't put it in because we are such programming studs you don't NEED it." } } }After saying all this though I have a proposition. We wrote Lemmings }in a very modular way (I take offence to previous comments stating }programmers who do not use the OS as 'brain dead', these people }obviously have no idea of constructive criticsm and should should join }rec.games.IQlessThan5) to the extent that we can have a HD intstallable version }running in 2 weeks time. I have proposed, Psygnosis have agreed, that }they will offer this version. It will require a minimum of 1 MEG of memory }(though only 512K of chip RAM will suffice). IF this version is successful, }(we should be able to offer an upgrade to users who have already bought the }game but want a HD version), then maybe Psygnosis will be swayed this way }for future products. We will probably switch to codeword protection }for future games (we MUST have some form of protection), and maybe }offer a 1 Meg HD AmigaDOS version for HD users. This bit of news makes me very happy indeed! For most folks with HDs, having at least 1 Meg shouldn't be a problem. I don't know of too many people with Amigas and Hard Drives that don't also have at least an extra 512K of RAM. In my user's group the order of buying seems to be: Amiga, Extra 512K RAM (if it was a A500C and needs it), hard drive. I would like to point out, that at least here in the states, there are THREE models of the A500. The A500C which is sold through mass merchandisers like JC Penny, etc. The A500P which is sold through Dealers only and has 1 MEG RAM standard and the A500S (starter) which is still a JC Penny sold machine and still 512K. My user's group suggests to anyone who asks us to purchase their machines from dealers over Mass Merchandisers only because they won't get upset with you if you come back looking for help and bought it from the dealer to begin with. (I know one dealer in Michigan that refuses to help anyone who bought a machine from a Mass Merchandiser. Can't blame them) The A500P means the number of A500 owners with at least 1 Meg will be growing and the path to owning an HD will be cut short one step. } }We will never compromise on a game for the sake of HD users. The base }machine we aim for will always be a 512K Amiga, of which we will use }ALL the memory, plus our own disk routines for speed. This means more }to the 90% of people that buy the games. As the times change, and the }hardware changes, so will the way we write the games. Understandable, but I still reserve right not to buy software that doesn't support the features I want irregardless of how "great" it may happen to be. } } }Lemmings is a fun game. I challenge anyone who buys it to point out }any flaws or gripes that has put them off other games. } }Dave Jones }DMA Design } Lemmings is indeed fun. Please send me info on when and where I may purchase a copy of the HD installable version of Lemmings. I will buy it if it does indeed come out as stated. To the others involved I say here's our chance to try and show our support for folks who support our machines the way we'd like them to. Let's prove we're serious by holding up our end of the bargain. --Moriland -- | hastoerm@vela.acs.oakland.edu | __ | | | __/// Viva Amiga! | | Founder Of: Evil Young | \XX/ | | Mutants For A Better Tomorrow | "Single Tasking: JUST SAY NO!" |
farren@sat.com (Michael J. Farren) (02/26/91)
rwkay@cs.hw.ac.uk writes: >Branding a game because it is PUBLISHED by a particular company, is >akin to not buying records pressed by WEA or CBS!, i.e. taking no >account of the performer. Well, if WEA or CBS sold records which could not be used on my B&O turntable (not a joke - I've got some records which cannot be played on it, due to transparency fooling the photoelectric sensor on the turntable), I'd be strongly tempted to avoid their products, too. In a way, it's YOUR problem - nobody forced you to go with Psygnosis, and if Lemmings is such a good game, you should have been able to find another publisher. >First of all the reasons for making lemmings a copy protected disk. >To most users this is transparent. I have no problem with copy protection per se, only with the effects which often come with it, such as Psygnosis' infamous "we won't run on a 68030" business. If yours doesn't do that, more power to you. >Remember other developers wrote other Psygnosis games, we did not write >Beast or Awesome. Perhaps. But if the copy protection troubles are caused by the developer, it still doesn't excuse Psygnosis for tacitly approving of the problems. >Right, to install on HD requires the operating system to be intact. >The operating system want 100K of CHIP RAM minimum. No. The OS wants RAM - it doesn't care whether it's CHIP or FAST, for the most part. And with a bit of intelligent programming, you can cut the required memory WAY down. It is true that the OS will eat some memory no matter what you do, but the figure isn't anything like 100K, once you've eliminated as many memory hogs as you can. Besides, you know from the beginning just how much memory you've got to play with - if you really DO need every single bit of a 512K system, how does that excuse your taking all of my 5 Megabytes? >We write our games to utitilise ALL the memory. Whether or not you need it all, it would seem. >We write our disk routines to be fast. You write your disk routines to take up CHIP RAM that otherwise could be used by the OS, right? >100K of CHIP is a serious amount of memory to lose. True - but 412K of CHIP is a serious amount to have to play around with, too. I'm hard to impress in this arena, having written full (and complex) games that have operated in as little as 16K RAM, including graphics, sound, and a LOT of fancy code. True, this was only an Atari 400, but still... Whining about how constrained you are by having "only" 412K makes me snicker. >To make the game HD installable would require us to use AmigaDOS on floppy. Not true. It isn't THAT hard to check the system resources (remember, autoconfig happens before booting does), and determine the environment you're running in. If it's AmigaDOS, you win, because you won't have to load your "special" disk routines, thus saving that RAM you claim is so precious. If you're booting from your floppies, go ahead and load your loader. Take over the machine. Do anything you want to - but if you're not, you don't NEED to do all of those things. There's precedent, here - several games (F18 Interceptor comes immediately to mind) that do different things if they have extra memory to work with. You, yourself, admit that you check to see if there's extra memory, and use it if it's there. Checking to see if a hard drive is there isn't any harder, really. Rule #1 - don't disable it unless you must. Don't take it over unless you must. Don't cripple it unless you must. And don't believe you must until it's proven - you're more clever than that. >This is seriously slower then our routines. Let me get this straight. You're seriously contending that your special floppy loader is faster than my 14ms SCSI disk and DMA controller? If so, you've been playing Lemmings too long :-) >We have deadlines to meet, we have other versions to write. To make >every version use full OS of all the machines we are using will take >a lot of time. Less time than having to "roll your own" for every different machine, I can guarantee you. The OS is there for your benefit. Use it when you can, bypass it only if you must (see rule #1). >Every owner of every machine wants a game to make use >of all the hardware they have. Where do we draw the line? Only where you have to. My point is that you didn't have to draw the line at HD install, but you chose to anyway, and were wrong. See rule #1, again. >Extra memory? Supported >Extra drives? Supported And kudos to you for that. I don't mean to imply that you are totally Evil (I reserve that for the folks from Ubisoft who require you to turn the damn POWER off to reboot in UNREAL), just slightly misguided in some areas :-) >HD installable, do you REALLY need it. Yes, I do. >You want your HD being filled with games? My HD is 27% games right NOW, and I'd put a lot more on it if they would run. I'd get a bigger disk if I could put Populous, Archipelagos, Beast, Unreal, and others on there. >You sit down to play a game when you have time, or are in the mood. Which is a lot of the time. I don't write games just for the money (I'd be a fool if I did - hey, folks, Cosmic Secret #1 - you're not likely to make a million bucks writing computer games). >No doubt some games NEED a HD (Cinemaware for example) Funny - they used the same excuses you are making now, back in the days when they didn't do HD install either. Maybe they now know something you don't? >Lemmings does not NEED the benefits of an HD. Have you ever considered that my HD might need the benefits of Lemmings? >After saying all this though I have a proposition. [A hard disk version of Lemmings] This is a handsome offer, and I thank you for it. It remains the fact, however, that selling two versions of a game is going to be less profitable than selling one version that satisfies everyone. If you'd included HD installation in the same version that ran on a 500, you'd be ahead even more (and so would we). >We will never compromise on a game for the sake of HD users. Nor should you. But you don't have to, you see... -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael J. Farren farren@sat.com | | He's moody, but he's cute. | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
specter@disk.uucp (Byron Max Guernsey) (02/28/91)
I can relate with everything in the author of lemmings post except the necessity for so much memory. I guess doing overlays in ML must be very difficult or something? I can't help but think of a program that was over 4 megs in size on an old pdp-11 that used overlays of 32-64k. Overlays do slow down the execution of a program, but overlays on a hard drive are just barely noticable. The time it takes to load in the new code is virtually nil. I also see no reason to FORCE the user to get rid of the operating system. With the necessary provisions, overlays, and code optimization for size you would have no problem fitting it in 512k (YEa, thats a big assumptiuon on my part, i don't know a whole lot about the amiga). Users with less than a meg or so would have to play Lemmings without the operating system, but those with a meg could leave it in?>!?!?! Why not? Imagine the hysteria if that 4 meg program took over the whole pdp. My suggestion is to work out different versions with different options. 1 for the low-end user (1 or 2 drives, 512k, no opsys) and 1 for the high-end users (hard drive, 1 meg+, Multi-tasking). Label the package, "Amiga 1 meg+, hd installable, keyword protection". The other one, "Amiga 512k (1 meg optional), 1 or 2 drives, Soft-Protection, no OPSYS" Charge 25$ for the 512k version, 35$+ for the hdable 1 meg. (Or whatever the current going rate is- haven't seen it yet in our store, just the demo). The extra work warrants a higher price and most hd users would be willing to pay a little more to put it on their hard drive and multi-task it if they run a large system. I'll never forget seeing a system where the owner had 8 megs of fast ram and i think a meg or 2 of CHIP ram (On 3000). He ran a bbs (multi-tasking) and was able to run Sim_city in the background, Zork Zero, and several daemon type tasks. He got normal use out of the amiga while running a Public BBS simutaneously. Thats how a multi-tasking machine SHOULD be. Hail to those who allow multi-tasking/hd-installability even at the cost of speed. Remember, while the computer will get faster and be able to handle a "HOG-GAME" using alot of CPU, a game that takes over the system will never allow multi-tasking. Byron -- Byron 'Maxwell' Guernsey | /// //\\ specter@disk.UUCP or | /// // \\ uunet!ukma!corpane!disk!specter | \\\/// //====\\ "Great programs aren't written, they're fathered." \\\/ // \\ m i g a
glee@tigris.uucp (Godfrey Lee) (03/01/91)
In article <5259@vela.acs.oakland.edu> hastoerm@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Moriland) writes: >}...to the extent that we can have a HD intstallable version >}running in 2 weeks time. I have proposed, Psygnosis have agreed, that >}they will offer this version. It will require a minimum of 1 MEG of memory >}(though only 512K of chip RAM will suffice). IF this version is successful, >}(we should be able to offer an upgrade to users who have already bought the >}game but want a HD version), then maybe Psygnosis will be swayed this way >}for future products. We will probably switch to codeword protection >}for future games (we MUST have some form of protection), and maybe >}offer a 1 Meg HD AmigaDOS version for HD users. I for one would certainly welcome the HD installable version, and look forward to the upgrade offer. If you must have copy protection, I prefer key disk to code wheel or keyword in manual. What can I say, I am lazy by nature. I also thank you in the fact that your copy protection does not grind the drive, and non-intrusive, but I still feel better to be able to have a backup. -- Godfrey Lee cunews!tigris!glee or glee@tigris.ocunix.on.ca
mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) (03/06/91)
[Dragging out some old stuff....]
In article <2370@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> rwkay@cs.hw.ac.uk (R.W.Kay) writes:
I have been reading the Lemmings talk with interest and I would like
to offer my opinions. These are the opinions of DMA Design, & not
Psygnosis. Remember we are developers, not publishers.
Branding a game because it is PUBLISHED by a particular company, is
akin to not buying records pressed by WEA or CBS!, i.e. taking no
account of the performer.
You're right - I don't not buy software because of the publisher. I
don't buy it when it's not usable. You chose a publisher that has a
track record of publishing unusuable game. Bad move, but not fatal.
Not being OS friendly is fatal, though - and loses you a sale.
We KNOW it does not stop the pirates. But you think we should give in?
Just release unprotected disks? Let every Tom, Dick or Harry copy the
disk with 'diskcopy df0: to df1:'
Have you tried "giving in"? Do you know what the results are? The one
case I know of (EAs Deluxe Paint), they lost so much in sales that
they quit releasing the copy protected version.
We have deadlines to meet, we have other versions to write. To make
every version use full OS of all the machines we are using will take
a lot of time. Every owner of every machine wants a game to make use
of all the hardware they have. Where do we draw the line?
Actually, I _don't_ want you games that make use of all the hardware I
have. I want games that make use of all the hardware I'm willing to
let them have. That happens to be more machine than you need (for
deserving games, I can give up a meg of chip and meg of fast...). And
you draw the line wherever you want - then don't complain when you
draw it on the lazy side, and people like me categorically refuse to
buy the game.
Extra memory? Supported
Extra drives? Supported
Really? So why doesn't it use both drives that came in my A3000?
HD installable, do you REALLY need it. You want your HD being filled
with games? You sit down to play a game when you have time, or are in the
mood.
I play a game while compiles are running in the background; while a
download is going one. _WITHOUT_ losing my editing environment or the
database I've got loaded, or whatever. Especially when I'm doing it
for a few minutes relaxation while working on a project. Lemmings
would be perfect for this - it already has a pause button for when I
want to go back to work, even.
Lemmings does not NEED the benefits of an HD.
You don't NEED to sell people like me a copy of the game, either.
I use Amiga's all the time, if I want to play a game I can live
with it taking 1 minute to load rather than 10 secs.
Sure, I can live with that. What I can't live with is the time it
takes to recreate the working environment you've gone out of your way
to destroy.
After saying all this though I have a proposition. We wrote Lemmings
in a very modular way (I take offence to previous comments stating
programmers who do not use the OS as 'brain dead', these people
obviously have no idea of constructive criticsm and should should join
rec.games.IQlessThan5) to the extent that we can have a HD intstallable
version running in 2 weeks time. I have proposed, Psygnosis have agreed,
that they will offer this version. It will require a minimum of 1 MEG of
memory (though only 512K of chip RAM will suffice).
Make it multitasking friendly, and I'll go buy a copy. Don't, and I'll
wait until the pirated version that is hits the boards. If that never
hits the boards, I'll never have a copy.
(we MUST have some form of protection)
And it's mathematically impossible for heavier-than-air vehicles to fly.
We will never compromise on a game for the sake of HD users.
I'll never compromise my work for the sake of a game.
Lemmings is a fun game. I challenge anyone who buys it to point out
any flaws or gripes that has put them off other games.
Well, I didn't buy it, so I guess the challange doesn't apply to me.
But even the bloody _demo_ version can't be run in a multitasking
environment. That puts me off a game pretty damn quick.
My Amiga is _not_ a game machine. It's a workstation I sometimes play
games on. Requiring me to treat it like a game machine which has to be
turned off to plug/unplug cartridges is unnaceptable. If I wanted
something like that, I'd have bought a Nintendo.
<mike
--
I know the world is flat. Mike Meyer
Don't try tell me that it's round. mwm@pa.dec.com
I know the world stands still. decwrl!mwm
Don't try to make it turn around.barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) (03/06/91)
In article <1991Mar1.055201.26618@tigris.uucp> glee@tigris.UUCP (Godfrey Lee) writes: >I also thank [the authors of Lemmings] >in the fact that your copy protection does not grind the drive, and >non-intrusive.... It doesn't?!!? Well, I have the demo version of Lemmings, and it grinds my A1000's drive terribly!! I would not buy a game that makes my drive sound like it is dying. I know that the demo version is not copy-protected, so I'll just have to assume that the custom disk routines are doing the grinding. It sounds AWFUL. Dan //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | Dan Barrett, Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University | | INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | | | COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP | \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////
d0nostro@dtek.chalmers.se (Henrik Alteborn) (03/08/91)
In article <7699@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: |> In article <1991Mar1.055201.26618@tigris.uucp> glee@tigris.UUCP (Godfrey Lee) writes: |> >I also thank [the authors of Lemmings] |> >in the fact that your copy protection does not grind the drive, and |> >non-intrusive.... |> |> It doesn't?!!? Well, I have the demo version of Lemmings, and it |> grinds my A1000's drive terribly!! I would not buy a game that makes my |> drive sound like it is dying. The demo grinds the drive(s), the real game does NOT ! |> I know that the demo version is not copy-protected, so I'll just |> have to assume that the custom disk routines are doing the grinding. It |> sounds AWFUL. Agree, never had anything that sounds worse. I have the .zom-version, does the dms-version sound just as bad ? -Henrik
kanta@sapphire.idbsu.edu (cs12501- Jay A Kanta) (03/09/91)
Well, to put in my two-cents worth, I think anyone without Lemmings is
only hurting themselves. Its Great! Its so addictive, I've forgotten to go
to bed one night already, and am thinking of skipping classes just to play
this excellent game.
I have one small problem, though. I thought the game was getting really
simple then I got to the 19th level on Tricky. I cannot, for the life of me,
think of doing anything differently than I have before this point. It looks
like so:
&
==============
=================
================= ============================
==================================== ============================
==================================================================
with the start on the left side and you only have 10 climbers,
10 floaters, 1 digger, 1 basher, and one miner. I really want to finish
this level, but I've already spent hours trying it. Can anyone help?
E-Mail would be great, but I can't send e-mail back (unfortunately).
Thanks!
Jay Kanta
'If time heals all wounds, why do we still have bellybuttons?'rmm20@ccc.amdahl.com (Robert Mitchell) (03/30/91)
OK, here is my contribution to the Great Lemming Debate:
I purchased Lemmings 28 days ago; I know because I am
looking at the Mastercard bill which I have not paid yet.
It was used maybe a dozen times; now it refuses to load.
Even a great game that will not load (tested on several systems)
is trash.
I returned it to my dealer, HT Electronics.
While they would not replace it, they did pay for a call
to Psygnetics in Massachusetts.
These people had the unmitigated gall to accuse me of
exposing their game to a Virus! As if media never failed.
If at my own expense, I mail it back to them and they
verify it is not Virus infested, they will send me a replacement,
date unspecified.
Personal opinions:
1) An ethical distributor would have the retail establishment
replace defective merchandise on the spot.
This would certainly be the case if I purchased a Nintendo
cartridge from Target.
2) An ethical distributor would use the best media available
if it is copy protected. This media is Kao.
3) An ethical distributor, concerned about Virus damage
to it's products, would use media without a write enable shutter.
In a game like Lemmings, there is no requirement to ever write
to the disk. It should be Virus proof. (My disks were never
write enabled).
Now what do I do?
1) Send the disks back to Psygnosis and trust them (?) to
actually send me a replacement. And if they get lost in shipping
or in Psgnosis' mail room, what are the chances of my getting
replacements?? I have no choice on this one, I have to send them back.
2) The Mastercharge bill. I can contest payment of the charge
to HT Electronics on the basis of defective merchandise until
I get a replacement, but this does not seem fair to HT.
I am really very opposed to copy protection.
- Robert Mitchell
--
UUCP: rmm20@juts.ccc.amdahl.com
DDD: 408-746-8491
USPS: Amdahl Corp. M/S 205, 1250 E. Arques Av, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
BIX: bobmitchellsparks@disk.uucp (John Sparks) (04/01/91)
rmm20@ccc.amdahl.com (Robert Mitchell) writes: >verify it is not Virus infested, they will send me a replacement, >date unspecified. Heck, even if it did get virus infected they should replace it. The way viruses are today, you really can't help it if you get infected. They should either replace it or not use impossible copy protection. (by the way, my lemmings! demo refuses to load now. wierd coincidence? It starts to load, the screen turns black, then the drive begins to gronk over and over and over, and never quits till I reboot. I am going to re-download it and put it on another floppy to make sure its not the disk.) -- John Sparks |"Help Fight Continental Drift!"| (502)957-4200 2400 BPS D.I.S.K. Management| Email: sparks@disk.UUCP | 6 lines, public access unix | uunet!coplex!disk!sparks | *Online Games*Usenet*Email*Chatting*Downloads*Supporting all computers*
jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay) (04/03/91)
From article <5bkf02r=06Zx01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, by rmm20@ccc.amdahl.com (Robert Mitchell): [experiences with lemmings/copy protection/disk won't work/etc deleted] > 2) The Mastercharge bill. I can contest payment of the charge > to HT Electronics on the basis of defective merchandise until > I get a replacement, but this does not seem fair to HT. > > I am really very opposed to copy protection. > > - Robert Mitchell I would contest the payment of the mastercharge bill. The dealer sold you defective merchandise. If they won't stand by what they sells then why should you buy anything from them. The dealer IS supposed to be responsible as a go-between from you to the distributer. If they have not fulfilled that duty then contest the charge. Let mastercharge know that you have received defective merchandise and they have refused to do anything about it. Don't feel sorry for the merchant, they are in it for the most money for the least amount of work - that is why they are trying to get you to do part of their work. If you want to tell them (HT) that you are going to contest the charge. Maybe then they will do some of their own work. Since lemmings is copy-protected, can only be played after IT's operating system brings the machine up, and controls the entire machine while it is running how the hell could a virus infect it. I think that psygnosis is trying to bullshit you. I would not pay them anymore money...contest the charge and let the dealer work it out with psygnosis (that is what they are supposed to be there for). In the meantime get a pirated copy (probably works better anyway) and play to your hearts content. just an opinion. john gay.
arc@desire.wright.edu (04/11/91)
I've been seeing all of these msgs about how bad Lemmings is, and that it was a port. This, if you know ANYTHING about porting, is NO port. Think about it, this game has 100 little Lemmings on the screen. The ST wouldn't be able to do this without slowing down much more than the Amiga. Plus, if you people didn't notice, this game is playing on a screen that is part hi-res (640x200) & part 320x200. The bottom is hires and the top is low-res (on game). This requires very wild programming. It is a first with that many colors. The ST OR EGA can't handle as many colors as our Lemmings game has (OVER 16 for sure). Lemmings was a fine production and I think it will become a classic on all computer platforms. Arc
bunny@cbnewsm.att.com (Laura A. Eppright) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr10.211842.3183@desire.wright.edu> arc@desire.wright.edu writes: > > I've been seeing all of these msgs about how bad Lemmings is, and >that it was a port. This, if you know ANYTHING about porting, is >NO port. I thought it was amusing that the IBM version doesn't support music unless you have some sort of special board. Also, I think it's the IBM version that doesn't have two player mode. I just figured out something last night. My boyfriend and I saw that "Lemmings is lame" posting that said all of the themes were from My Fair Lady, and he was trying to remember a song of that name from the movie. Well, I think what the original poster was trying to say was that all of the songs were based on "London Bridge is Falling Down". My apologies if an alternate title is indeed "My Fair Lady", but I don't think so. -- Laura A. Eppright | AT&T, 30 Knightsbridge Rd | I'm never sarcastic. Piscataway, NJ att!attmail!leppright |
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (04/16/91)
arc@desire.wright.edu writes: > I've been seeing all of these msgs about how bad Lemmings is, and >that it was a port. This, if you know ANYTHING about porting, is >NO port. True enough, but not for the reasons you state... >Think about it, this game has 100 little Lemmings on >the screen. The ST wouldn't be able to do this without slowing >down much more than the Amiga. More, yes. Much more? I don't know - check out my "tutorial" for details on the drawing scheme - it might not slow down all that much, actually. The actual drawing part of Lemmings isn't where all the time goes. >Plus, if you people didn't notice, >this game is playing on a screen that is part hi-res (640x200) & >part 320x200. The bottom is hires and the top is low-res (on game). No, it's not. 320 X 200 X 16 colors for the entire screen. Look again. >This requires very wild programming. Even if it was the way you said, it isn't wild programming - just what the Amiga has always done. >It is a first with that many colors. Hardly. >The ST OR EGA can't handle as many colors as our Lemmings >game has (OVER 16 for sure). Again - look again. 16 colors, that's all. EGA could certainly handle it. And, in fact, does. The ST, as well. >Lemmings was a fine production and I think it will become a classic on all >computer platforms. Well, I agree with you there! -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem) (04/17/91)
Speaking of ST/Amiga display... All the stuff I saw on the amiga run has fast or faster on a ST. And you should be able to get alot more than a 100 on screen at 60 frame second with only 16 colors! The best example for this is XENONII.
kxgj@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (06/10/91)
To all concerned about the 'Psygnosis thing': First off, this is not a flame to either side. I was chagrined when I heard about the key disk solution to Lemmings, enough so that I penned a multipaged letter to Psygnosis that explained the inadequacy of that approach (for me, that is). I also collected the 17 most recent postings on this newsgroup on the subject to include (to demonstrate the widespread nature of that feeling). However, that letter will not be sent. I was just in a local store that had the issue of INFO that contained the news about the impending Lemmings release (if you remember, that was what RE-started this thread not too long ago--a comment on that news). I read the blurb and saw something that surprised me becasue of its content and the fact that noone else mentioned it. The article said that Psygnosis said (will it stand up in court though???? :-) that future releases will use a code wheel!! If that is accurate, it adds a bit of credence to Psyg's statement that Lemmings was released with key disk protection to get it out sooner. Also, it addresses my concerns/needs considerably better than I thought from the original post. Granted, this does NOT help for Lemmings but I might buy it anyway if they follow through with releasing products that are not disk-based protected. If INFO's info is correct, KUDOS to Psygnosis from me. Anyway, keep an eye out for future releases. Could the (noisy) consumer have won a battle??? Kirk
hoffmann@acl.kodak.com (marty hoffmann) (06/11/91)
In article <1991Jun10.120200.5360@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> kxgj@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: > >[...] I was just in a local store that had >the issue of INFO that contained the news about the impending Lemmings >release (if you remember, that was what RE-started this thread not too long >ago--a comment on that news). I read the blurb and saw something that >surprised me becasue of its content and the fact that noone else mentioned it. >The article said that Psygnosis said (will it stand up in court though???? :-) >that future releases will use a code wheel!! [...] I was the person that RE-started this thread, and I admit that I did not mention the fact that Psygnosis said that future versions would have a code wheel. It was not my intention to misinform, but I realize that I did a disservice to those who did not have access to the blurb from ".Info". I apologize. Still, I find it hard to believe that if the key-disk version of Lemmings doesn't sell, Psygnosis is going to bend over backwards to produce a code-whell protected version. I also find it hard to believe that the key-disk version was that much faster to produce (cheaper maybe, but faster?). I admit that I don't know alot about producing and distributing computer games, but I'm still skeptical. I hope I am wrong. MRH -- *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* | Martin R Hoffmann | Opinions expressed above are | | (hoffmann@acl.kodak.com) | not Kodak's (blah blah blah) | *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
bleys@tronsbox.xei.com (Bill Cavanaugh) (06/11/91)
In article <1991Jun10.120200.5360@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> kxgj@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: > [stuff deleted] [stuff about Psygnosis' plans to use a code wheel in the future deleted] I think the reason people are so hot about this, and are so anxious to flame Psynosis, is that the games are, aside from the copy protection, the best on the market. The only games I've enjoyed lately have been either Cinemaware (are they really dead?), Psynosis, or SSI's D&D stuff (and that's only because of the genre -- the interface needs work). People wouldn't be so upset with Psyg if they didn't want to play the games. I hope the people there realize that all of this negative attention is actually a compliment! > >Anyway, keep an eye out for future releases. Could the (noisy) consumer have >won a battle??? > It sure looks like it! -- * Bill Cavanaugh bleys@tronsbox.xei.com * * * * Who woulda thought that by staying in one place * * I'd become a refugee? * * * * Doug and the Slugs *