What do people think of this right here on byond? The graphics couldn't be anything like the first-person maze-like view that is displayed in all the wizardry games, but the idea would be the same: only one town and a dungeon that goes down like 20 floors and get progressively more difficult as one goes further down. What do people think?
-Dagolar
ID:153762
 Feb 11 2003, 6:09 pm
|
|
|
Feb 11 2003, 6:27 pm
|
|
Jermman
 |
That would be neat, I used to really like that game.
|
Dago wrote:
What do people think of this right here on byond? The graphics couldn't be anything like the first-person maze-like view that is displayed in all the wizardry games, but the idea would be the same: only one town and a dungeon that goes down like 20 floors and get progressively more difficult as one goes further down. What do people think? Believe it or not, you might be able to pull off the "dungeon-crawl" graphics that the original Wizardry used. I know that, at one point in time, Leftley had a demo that displayed that kind of functionality. Perhaps he'd be willing to resurrect it from the BYOND? | |
Now instead of the old Wizardry games as they were, what if you put it in a final fantasy style? You still run around the maze in the first person view but when you get into a scrap you see your characters and the monsters spread out. You can also walk around town like your character icon. Does this sound like an interesting twist?
-Dagolar | |
Add randomly generated maze-like maps and randomly populate it with monsters that get progressively more powerful as you descend... just like that old roguelike, Mines of Moria. =)
| |
Shut up unless you want to be randomly hit in a random body part with a randomly flying random object, you randomized pedant. =P
| |
Dago wrote:
Now instead of the old Wizardry games as they were, what if you put it in a final fantasy style? You still run around the maze in the first person view but when you get into a scrap you see your characters and the monsters spread out. You can also walk around town like your character icon. Does this sound like an interesting twist? It sounds like the middle Ultimas with a smaller world and dummied-down combat system. | |
Believe it or not, you might be able to pull off the "dungeon-crawl" graphics that the original Wizardry used. I know that, at one point in time, Leftley had a demo that displayed that kind of functionality. Perhaps he'd be willing to resurrect it from the BYOND? It's pretty easy to whip up, actually (I should know--I've built that demo from scratch 5 or 6 times now). The only real problem is trying to come up with a good implementation for sprites (which isn't an issue for something that follows the engine of Wizardry or Bard's Tale, which was my intention in the first place... yet it's always bugged me anyways!). That huge 10x10 map screen version you saw for bug-squishing was kinda slow on most systems, but smaller versions have always run seamlessly for me (at least in single-player). | |
Dago wrote:
Is it worth going to that length to get that kind of effect, do you think? Well, let's see here. The original Wizardry was a first-person dungeon crawl with minimalist town and combat interfaces. Thus far you have announced adding Final Fantasy style town and combat interfaces instead, and even after being presented with the knowledge that BYOND is capable of handling simple first-person view, you still seem inclined to drop the idea of a first-person dungeon. Shall we act surprised when, as a neat twist, your Wizardry style classes turn out to include dragoons and callers rather than bishops and lords? | |
All I was asking is if you think it's worth it...Man, I'm just spitting out ideas here. You need not get too presumptuous, people seem to enjoy that. I want to hear YOUR opinion on that idea, not your judging of MY opinion. Do you think it's worth going to the effort to make a first-person view of the dungeon maze?
-Dagolar | |
You seem interested in the idea. Other people seem interested too. You've been told that its possible. If you are interested in making this kind of game then make it, don't turn it into a generic Final Fantasy kind of RPG. The first-person view would separate it from all of the overhead-view games, which would probably be a good thing.
| |
K....I agree with that. I will pass it along. It would be nice to have a new style of graphic like that here on byond.
-Dagolar | |
Dago wrote:
Do you think it's worth going to the effort to make a first-person view of the dungeon maze? My opinion is that this is a ridiculous question. Wizardry is renowned as a first-person dungeon crawl; how exactly do you make a Wizardry style RPG that is not a first-person dungeon crawl? In the context of what is billed as a "Wizardry style RPG", it is not an effort which is simply "worth it"; it is an effort which is absolutely central to the concept. If you want to make a Wizardry-style dungeon game, go ahead; and if you instead want to make a Final Fantasy-style dungeon game, go ahead and do that instead; and if you want to do some combination of the two, then by God you can go ahead and do that as well. Just don't do one thing and call it another. | |
Leftley wrote:
It's pretty easy to whip up, actually (I should know--I've built that demo from scratch 5 or 6 times now). Yeah? So lets see some links. | |
People have a lot of trouble answering a simple question. I'm trying to get an opinion. I want to hear it from a number of people. Do YOU, Leftley, think it's worth the work?
-Dagolar | |
Dago wrote:
People have a lot of trouble answering a simple question. I'm trying to get an opinion. I want to hear it from a number of people. Do YOU, Leftley, think it's worth the work? People have a lot of trouble asking a simple question. You could have simply started a thread asking if people would be interested in seeing a Final Fantasy-style dungeon crawl game, but instead you have to pull this bait-and-switch nonsense. It has been specifically mentioned in this thread that I have done it, and seen fit to do it again and again several times--so, to play along with your little charade, the answer is yes, I think it's worth the work. While we're at it, I think that bait-and-switch style tactics of any sort are underhanded, unethical, and flat-out insulting to the intelligence of anyone over the age of 5. I have plenty of other relevant opinions, but for the sake of maintaining some semblance of civility, I believe I will end this conversation here. | |
Allow me to clarify my position on two points:
1. I really, really like Wizardry. I like dungeon crawls in general, and although Wizardry isn't the world's best dungeon crawl ever, it's still one of the great classics. 2. I really despise bait-and-switch marketing. I despise a lot of marketing tricks in general; to some extent I am willing to accept marketing as a necessary evil, but to my eyes the primary goal of marketing should be to make a product be accessible to a customer--it should stand on its own merits. Now, upon seeing a thread entitled "Wizardry style RPG?", the only possible response that enters my mind is to grab a megaphone and yell "YES!" at the top of my lungs. However, I didn't notice this thread until it had already gotten decently underway, by which time a subtle shift in tone had occured, and Dago was polling for responses to a game that would only bear likeness to Wizardry in terms of the size of its game world--one not-particularly-large, presumably static dungeon, and a simple town to serve as a base for exploring it. Upon reading this, I was a bit miffed, as I had sort of been expecting something that would really represent Wizardry. I continue to have a hard time believing that Dago's "twist" was actually a sudden relevation he had in the 50 minutes between starting the thread and posting about it, and don't see why he couldn't have been more forthcoming in the first place, and further consider his debate tactics here to be highly evasive; regardless of all that, however, there is no question that I overreacted to what was a harmless, if also pointless ploy, and for this I apologize. On a somewhat broader note, I know that I do come off as a jerk sometimes, and usually this is largely unintentional; humor features very prominently in my guiding philosophy, and in general I conciously strive to avoid taking anything--myself included--too seriously for very long. This series of posts, however, marks the first argument I've gotten into in a while where I've spoken in genuine anger, and the only possible defense I can present is that yes, Wizardry is worth getting worked up over. P.S. TREBOR SUX | |