>Mortyr 2093-1944 - vaguely remember the name Mortyr - awful game as I
>recall

The only one of the whole list I've played, but only the demo!

rms

>Arguably, some of the games in the original list ("Blake Stone",
>"Shadowcaster", "Marathon", etc.)

Marathon is getting some sort of remaster/remake

rms

On 5/25/2023 11:29 AM, rms wrote:
>> Arguably, some of the games in the original list ("Blake Stone",
>> "Shadowcaster", "Marathon", etc.)
>
>   Marathon is getting some sort of remaster/remake
>
These days it seems more games are getting remakes than not.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:33:53 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 5/25/2023 11:29 AM, rms wrote:
>>> Arguably, some of the games in the original list ("Blake Stone",
>>> "Shadowcaster", "Marathon", etc.)

>>   Marathon is getting some sort of remaster/remake

>These days it seems more games are getting remakes than not.

That's because most of the older IPs are owned by larger publishers,
and larger publishers are extremely loathe to try anything new or
risky. There's no guarantee that a new property will find an audience,
but a remake is all but guaranteed a certain number of sales, either
from the nostalgic who remember the game from their younger days, or
from people who have heard of this 'classic' but missed out on playing
it when it first came out.

Ignore all the fluff about how a remake is about "updating a game for
new technology" or "reintroducing a classic to a new audience". If
that was the case, they'd just re-release the original on GOG or
something. Remakes are solely made because they make money; they're
cheaper to make and have an immediate audience.

It's similar to why triple-A publishers LOVE sequels.

On Fri, 26 May 2023 09:27:16 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:33:53 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>On 5/25/2023 11:29 AM, rms wrote:
>>>> Arguably, some of the games in the original list ("Blake Stone",
>>>> "Shadowcaster", "Marathon", etc.)
>
>>>   Marathon is getting some sort of remaster/remake
>
>>These days it seems more games are getting remakes than not.
>
>That's because most of the older IPs are owned by larger publishers,
>and larger publishers are extremely loathe to try anything new or
>risky. There's no guarantee that a new property will find an audience,
>but a remake is all but guaranteed a certain number of sales, either
>from the nostalgic who remember the game from their younger days, or
>from people who have heard of this 'classic' but missed out on playing
>it when it first came out.
>
>Ignore all the fluff about how a remake is about "updating a game for
>new technology" or "reintroducing a classic to a new audience". If
>that was the case, they'd just re-release the original on GOG or
>something. Remakes are solely made because they make money; they're
>cheaper to make and have an immediate audience.
>
>It's similar to why triple-A publishers LOVE sequels.

That and an actual "experience the classic" experience will make your
eyes bleed.

After playing DOOM with GZDoom for years, I tried playing the original
again in DOSBox. TL;DR: YIKES.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 May 2023 09:27:16 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

> >On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:33:53 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> ><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> >>On 5/25/2023 11:29 AM, rms wrote:
> >>>> Arguably, some of the games in the original list ("Blake Stone",
> >>>> "Shadowcaster", "Marathon", etc.)
> >
> >>>   Marathon is getting some sort of remaster/remake
> >
> >>These days it seems more games are getting remakes than not.
> >
> >That's because most of the older IPs are owned by larger publishers,
> >and larger publishers are extremely loathe to try anything new or
> >risky. There's no guarantee that a new property will find an audience,
> >but a remake is all but guaranteed a certain number of sales, either
> >from the nostalgic who remember the game from their younger days, or
> >from people who have heard of this 'classic' but missed out on playing
> >it when it first came out.
> >
> >Ignore all the fluff about how a remake is about "updating a game for
> >new technology" or "reintroducing a classic to a new audience". If
> >that was the case, they'd just re-release the original on GOG or
> >something. Remakes are solely made because they make money; they're
> >cheaper to make and have an immediate audience.
> >
> >It's similar to why triple-A publishers LOVE sequels.

> That and an actual "experience the classic" experience will make your
> eyes bleed.

> After playing DOOM with GZDoom for years, I tried playing the original
> again in DOSBox. TL;DR: YIKES.

For me, https://dengine.net (still no new recent releases) so I can get
better graphics like polygon models and higher graphic textures. :) I
can't stand FPS' pixels anymore. :P

--
"I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given to me--the task of testifying to the gospel of God's grace." --Acts 20:24. Slammy weeky so far even when avoiding the outdoors except Fri. & summer break started already b4 Memorial Day weekend.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

On Sat, 27 May 2023 14:16:01 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
>Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 May 2023 09:27:16 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,

>> That and an actual "experience the classic" experience will make your
>> eyes bleed.

>> After playing DOOM with GZDoom for years, I tried playing the original
>> again in DOSBox. TL;DR: YIKES.

>For me, https://dengine.net (still no new recent releases) so I can get
>better graphics like polygon models and higher graphic textures. :) I
>can't stand FPS' pixels anymore. :P

I actually don't mind original-Doom's visuals (even though my
preferred method is with a source-port) and still fire it up
occassionally for nostalgia's sake. What I dislike about DOS-Doom,
though, is it's controls; my brain has been rewired to used
mouselook/WASD and going back to using the cursor keys is painful. But
the blocky pixels? I'm fine with those.

But you can go too far in the other direction with source-ports. The
raytracing port I mentioned in an earlier post may have boasted
realistic lighting, but it cost the game its oppressive atmosphere.
Similarly, I've tried mods (like Brutal Doom Black Edition*) that
upgraded the visuals tremendously, and - while everything looked nicer
- it just didn't feel like Doom. It's probably because the realistic
textures and lighting don't jibe well with the simplistic level
design; I think it is a variaton of the 'uncanny valley' effect except
extended to map-making.

* see a trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m65I6cUEUo

On Sat, 27 May 2023 12:38:39 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>Similarly, I've tried mods (like Brutal Doom Black Edition*) that
>upgraded the visuals tremendously, and - while everything looked nicer
>- it just didn't feel like Doom. It's probably because the realistic
>textures and lighting don't jibe well with the simplistic level
>design; I think it is a variaton of the 'uncanny valley' effect except
>extended to map-making.

That is a weird mix of the original sprites and lightmapped levels.

I'm going to try it!

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
....
> I actually don't mind original-Doom's visuals (even though my
> preferred method is with a source-port) and still fire it up
> occassionally for nostalgia's sake. What I dislike about DOS-Doom,
> though, is it's controls; my brain has been rewired to used
> mouselook/WASD and going back to using the cursor keys is painful. But
> the blocky pixels? I'm fine with those.

Oh yeah, can't look up and down. I was a keyboarder back then. However,
the newer FPS (e.g., Quake) and classic Doom engines (e.g, Doomsday
Engine), I used with the mouse.

> But you can go too far in the other direction with source-ports. The
> raytracing port I mentioned in an earlier post may have boasted
> realistic lighting, but it cost the game its oppressive atmosphere.
> Similarly, I've tried mods (like Brutal Doom Black Edition*) that
> upgraded the visuals tremendously, and - while everything looked nicer
> - it just didn't feel like Doom. It's probably because the realistic
> textures and lighting don't jibe well with the simplistic level
> design; I think it is a variaton of the 'uncanny valley' effect except
> extended to map-making.

Brutal Doom looked fun, but man the sprites. :P

> * see a trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m65I6cUEUo

WHat's Black Edition? A fork of Brutal Doom?
--
"I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given to me--the task of testifying to the gospel of God's grace." --Acts 20:24. Slammy weeky so far even when avoiding the outdoors except Fri. & summer break started already b4 Memorial Day weekend.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

>>>>> On 2023-05-27, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 27 May 2023 14:16:01 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
>>>>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>> After playing DOOM with GZDoom for years, I tried playing the
>>> original again in DOSBox. TL;DR: YIKES.

>> For me, https://dengine.net (still no new recent releases) so I can
>> get better graphics like polygon models and higher graphic textures. :)
>> I can't stand FPS' pixels anymore. :P

> I actually don't mind original-Doom's visuals (even though my
> preferred method is with a source-port) and still fire it up
> occassionally for nostalgia's sake. What I dislike about DOS-Doom,
> though, is it's controls; my brain has been rewired to used
> mouselook/WASD and going back to using the cursor keys is painful.
> But the blocky pixels? I'm fine with those.

So am I. And so I'm mostly using the Crispy Doom port.

Granted, it's not so blocky, as it supports 640 by 400 (as well
as the original 320 by 200), but more to the point is that it
claims to support mouselook, too. (Not something I've ever grown
proficient with, though.)

Otherwise, not unlike the Chocolate Doom I've mentioned previously,
it mostly stays true to the original, DOS game.

--
FSF associate member #7257 http://am-1.org/~ivan/

ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) looked up from reading the entrails of the porn
spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

<snip>
>Brutal Doom looked fun, but man the sprites. :P

Almost sounds like one of those sayings; "Brutal Sprites of DOOM!"

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

I remember Rebel Moon with some fondness. The lighting effects were good at the time, up there trying to compete with Quake 2

On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 22:10:16 -0700 (PDT), Shinnokxz
<shinnokxz@gmail.com> wrote:

>I remember Rebel Moon with some fondness. The lighting effects were good at
>the time, up there trying to compete with Quake 2

I remember lusting after Rebel Moon because of those lighting effects.
It was truly incredible, and was one of the first games to use the
technology extensively and it added so much to the atmosphere. It was
one of the earliest games to really convince me that "graphics
accelerators" were more than just /fast/ video cards, but something
that might really change how our games look and play.

Sadly, the game was limited to very specific chipsets (the Creative
Labs 3D Blaster, I think?) and was only released as a pack-in with
those cards. And although there have been hacks that can get it to run
on other hardware, finding a CD of the game is inordinately difficult
these days...