Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Talk about anything Legend of Grimrock 1 related here.
Post Reply
lowzei
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:00 pm

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by lowzei »

@Jirodyne
It doesn't matter for my personal experience but it can be a difference for the developer. This review simply was bad and therefore people got upset. LoG had a lot of success but there are also games which aren't doing this well and i think in such scenarios it does matter that a review, putting subjective views aside, still is fair, right and well researched.
Ixnatifual

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Ixnatifual »

Only if any game of a genre is a shameless copy of an early game of that genre. Ie. Call of Duty is a shameless copy of Catacomb 3D. StarCraft 2 is a shameless copy of Dune 2. Guild Wars 2 is a shameless copy of Everquest.

I personally enjoyed Lands of Lore, Ishar etc. even though they were apparently shameless copies of Dungeon Master.
Kukulcan
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 10:38 pm

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Kukulcan »

Thanks!

About the "barren" look of the dungeon, I had some interesting experience. We are developing something similar and so I told our artist what elements he needs to make for one dungeon design. His answer was: "Why should I do that? Nobody would ever play a game where all the hallways look the same".

Playing Grimrock this was absolutely no problem for me, but it made me understand a little how people without DM, EOB or similar background will see the game. I wouldn't say it is an excellent review, but sure not unfair and it does't come to the conclusion that LoG is a "dreist" or lazy cash-in.
User avatar
Jirodyne
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2012 6:07 am

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Jirodyne »

Kukulcan wrote:"Why should I do that? Nobody would ever play a game where all the hallways look the same".
Hmm... In most cases this would be true to most people. They want a rich beautiful world. Then I point out how well that was going from Morrowind to Oblivion. I don't like basing a game on graphics. But that's just me and my life time of having crappy comps that can only play the older 'uglier' games. xD

Anyways, I don't think that statement can be applied to this game. If every wall was different, except the ones with hidden switches on them, everyone would be able to tell since the walls with switches only have 1 texture depending on the switch, so looking for that 1 wall texture. I think it works well in this game having only so many wall textures. Cause then we see the walls everywhere, subconsciously skimming over them and not taking in all the details as we walk by, and easily over looking the one with the secret switches on them, 'since all the hallways look the same'. I've beaten the game, found almost every secret, and I still miss one or two here and there on my second and third play through cause I miss the switches and forget where they are, since all the walls look the same :P
Ixnatifual

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Ixnatifual »

Plus most people don't actually care if most walls are the same. As long as there's some variety, and it actually looks good, it's great. People have played and enjoyed games like this for decades. And still are.
Kukulcan
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 10:38 pm

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Kukulcan »

No need to defend LoG, obviously many people like it, just that I can understand better how people only accustomed to fully detailed worlds will find the concept pretty strange.
Tenzek
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:54 am

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Tenzek »

Jinxed wrote:
earthyearth wrote:its like saying that all MMORPGS are copies of World of Warcraft just cuz they are MMOs in fantasy settings
More like shameless ultima online copies :P
And UO was a Meridian 59 copy, which was a Neverwinter Nights copy (old 4-bit color game on AOL).

NWN was 1991 and went from 75 to 500 max players online over its lifetime. I am not aware of an older multiplayer RPG that had its own dedicated servers.
Rya.Reisender
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2012 6:46 pm

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by Rya.Reisender »

Copies aren't even something bad if they are done right.

I rather have copies of games with my favorite gameplay style over and over again than developers trying something new and innovative that just isn't fun to play.
User avatar
LiamKerrington
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:18 am

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by LiamKerrington »

Rya.Reisender wrote:I rather have copies of games with my favorite gameplay style over and over again than developers trying something new and innovative that just isn't fun to play.
THIS! +1
At the end of my first time with "the Legend of Grimrock" - played on default-party, hard, old-school mode:

My first time
User avatar
jontycampbell
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:15 am
Location: Manchester, England.
Contact:

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Post by jontycampbell »

Alas with DM, it won't play on win7... Bah!

But Lands of Lore will...

How to do Patrick Stewart quick & easy on that game:

"Lands av Law" (Lands of Lore) :-) [Up...down down...]
Post Reply