Grimrock

@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.

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.

lowzei wrote:@Kukulcan
http://www.kultboy.com/index.php?site=t&id=1199

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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...]