metadigital Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Um. I have a copy of Wolfenstein-3D, and it looks better than that ... did they make an update / sequel? OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
karka Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 (edited) Yes. Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Edited March 2, 2006 by karka
metadigital Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Yes. Return to Castle Wolfenstein. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ah. That'sit! OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
BattleCookiee Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 alanschu just confirmed that even from the beginning people cared more about graphics in FPS than gameplay " And quality-terms are; LIGHTMAPING TEXTURED BARRELS And I knew there was Multiplayer in Doom... but it wasn't internet so I just did some bad word choosing... :">
metadigital Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Donkey Kong barrels? OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
alanschu Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 I'd suspect you are part of an excruciatingly small minority of people that think the gameplay between the two games are on par. The level design was light years ahead of anything Wolfenstein 3D could do, because of the engine.
metadigital Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 True, Mr Carmack made his phenomenal reputation on that game ... OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Moose Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 What makes Lionheart so bad? Unfinished? Something else? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Lack of depth. Not particularly intellectual. 'Unfinished' - I never actually completed it mind; quit before arriving at England. If you're not a Diablo fan take all those feeling and they translate well to Lionheart. There are none that are right, only strong of opinion. There are none that are wrong, only ignorant of facts
BattleCookiee Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 I already get the point alanschu; Good games are good games because of better graphical engines! Rule of the old, rule of the new...
alanschu Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Don't be so obtuse. Grow up. Doom > Wolf3D in every aspect, not just graphics.
karka Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Doom's interface doesn't even show your score! How can it be better? :D
Llyranor Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Give it up, alanschu. You'll never win! Never! (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
alanschu Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 It is rather like arguing with Magical Volo, now that you mention it.
Gabrielle Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 You guys have no life. So many pages to read through since I signed off this morning?
BattleCookiee Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Well, I am basing it on when I played both around the release of Unreal Tournament... so for me it was all about the gameplay; I played UT if I wanted graphics. And I won't budge on this one, whatever you gonna try...
metadigital Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 So you are admitting that you are impervious to logic? OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Diogo Ribeiro Posted March 2, 2006 Author Posted March 2, 2006 He'd be the first to admit it in these forums. Certainly should net him some sort of award.
Llyranor Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 <3 Darwin awards (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
BattleCookiee Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 So you are admitting that you are impervious to logic? Logic != fun Fun != logic for some it seems...
ShadowPaladin V1.0 Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 Doom was shareware. Quake is usually where people go for the game that started the FPS ball rolling. I have to agree with Volourn. Bioware is pretty much dead now. Deals like this kills development studios. 478327[/snapback]
alanschu Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 Quake was released via Shareware as well. It's big impact was large scale internet multiplayer.
Recommended Posts