http://www.syberflex.de/deepworld/pictures/tush90.jpgCDN_Merlin wrote:dl the movies. I find it very bad graphics and I'm surprised they can actually get away with copying Descent so much without the rights to it.
CDN_Merlin wrote:dl the movies. I find it very bad graphics and I'm surprised they can actually get away with copying Descent so much without the rights to it.
You don't really know the project at all. All you have seen are some pretty aged screen shots and a few pretty bad game play movies.CDN_Merlin wrote:MD, I saw the higer res pics, but the "whats the word I'm looking for" The cockpit isn't as nice as in D3 or D2.
Just looks really badly designed. Don't tell me to code it myself, I know how difficult it is. I'm just stating my view.
A clone is an exact copy (or very similar to the original at least), I'd say. Who cares anyway? It's a D1/D2 look alike based on current gfx tech. Who doesn't like it: Just leave it. I hope that at least that guy will manage to finish his project, and not "get lost in translation" somewhere in the middle of it, like all the other oh-so-promising D2 upgrade projects that have been.Lothar wrote:Wow, when you said "Descent clone" I thought "game based on similar premises"... I didn't realize it was an exact copy.
).there are many great levels out there already, and yes: built with D3Edit as it is. plus, it's being currently worked on to improve it even more.Diedel wrote:I like D2 more than D3. All the D3 multiplayer levels I have seen (And I have looked at a few) look pretty barren to me. Most of them are as "boxy" as D2 levels (and there are a few non-"boxy" D2 levels around as nice counter-arguments to that kind of argument against D2). I also don't feel the gameplay of D3 being superior to D2's.
Maybe that would change if I'd ever build a D3 level (but then I might probably have to rewrite the D3 level editor, which will presumably be way more work than DLE-XP, and I am definitely running out of time
That's Aquanox. We pleaded with them to put 6DF controls in the sequel, but they didn't. They seemed to think that there are only two possible control styles: FPS and flight sim.bash wrote:What ever happened to Aqua-something? I though Mobius was touting that as the *New Descent* quite a while ago.
De Rigueur wrote:That's Aquanox. We pleaded with them to put 6DF controls in the sequel, but they didn't. They seemed to think that there are only two possible control styles: FPS and flight sim.bash wrote:What ever happened to Aqua-something? I though Mobius was touting that as the *New Descent* quite a while ago.
Good luck to Deep World.
I thought it was N-Trap or some such that he was so keen on. Or maybe it was designing space stations.woodchip wrote:De Rigueur wrote:That's Aquanox. We pleaded with them to put 6DF controls in the sequel, but they didn't. They seemed to think that there are only two possible control styles: FPS and flight sim.bash wrote:What ever happened to Aqua-something? I though Mobius was touting that as the *New Descent* quite a while ago.
Good luck to Deep World.
Or maybe N-Space
What? It's not like there's a patent on "a game like Descent" or anything. I mean, seriously, look at all the cookie-cutter FPS games. The source being out has nothing to do with this I'm sure.CDN_Merlin wrote:Just because the Descent source is out does not give anyone the right to make a game like Descent. Having the source does not give you 100% of the game.
Do you really believe that? LMAO! That's pretty ridiculous.CDN_Merlin wrote:Just because the Descent source is out does not give anyone the right to make a game like Descent. Having the source does not give you 100% of the game.
I have np with you not liking it (though you cannot really judge it yet, imho). I don't like the way you vent your feelings about it here. But then I guess I can ignore you on such occasions in the future.CDN_Merlin wrote:From what I've seen, this game doesn't interest me much. If you don't like that well to bad.
No, he actually isn't. You don't understand the context. The guy making Deep World is creating his game from scratchLothar wrote:merlin is actually right -- having the source does *NOT* give you 100% of the game. Having the source, plus the compiler, plus all of the resources (including sounds, models, levels, and textures) plus anything else I missed would give you the whole game.
Having the source also doesn't make it legal to actually write your own clone of the game, or to distribute versions partially compiled from that source. It is, rather unfortunately, not the most straightforward legal question. From what I understand, even though D1 source is out, it's *still* illegal to distribute the commercial version of D1 (it's legal to distribute things like the D1x executable -- but you can't play D1 if all you had was d1x.exe; you need levels and config files from the full game.) I would think similar issues might come in to play here. You'd have to read the license agreement that comes with the game, and the one that comes with the source, to be sure.
Imo this is a remark about as mindless and offensive as can be, being based on my reaction on one single post here. I could say "immmature". I simply felt merlin being deliberately negative about that project, putting it down pretty much and with mostly pointless arguments, and that's what I disliked. I think the Deep World guy is putting a lot of effort in his game, and I don't like seeing somebody like that being put down by people in a bad mood or spirit.Lothar wrote:Now, don't take this as a knock on the Deep World project (you seem to be reacting harshly to anything even remotely resembling criticism... but you shouldn't be.)
Most of what that guy does is his own works: Gfx engine, complete game code, textures. He is currently using a few resources reminiscent of Descent - but I doubt there is much grounds to take legal action against him for Interplay based on that - so much less, if he doesn't take money for his project once it is done.Lothar wrote:It looks nice, and I really hope it turns into a worthwhile game. But some caution should be exercised -- there are definitely legal issues that need worked out. This is especially true in this case, since it looks like they intend to really reproduce the Descent concept on a new engine, rather than simply creating a Descent-like game (such as Forsaken.)
Like Tetrad said, there's not a patent out on "Descent-like games". But Interplay and Parallax do still own the rights to Descent, and making something that's a clear copy of Descent puts that group on pretty shaky legal ground. If they made a 3D mine-based shooter game with generally similar gameplay, nobody could complain -- but if they make a 3D mine-based shooter where you fly a pyro-GX with lasers, vulcan, spreadfire, plasma, and fusion they're clearly in the realm of copyright infringement, which is shaky on both legal and ethical grounds. Remember that even Outrage and Volition aren't allowed to just make D4 or any other new Descent game -- they can't do it without Parallax and Interplay agreeing to allow them to. For someone else to make a new Descent game (not just a similar type of game, but a true Descent game) without permission... that would be lame, and disrespectful to Parallax. (I don't mind if you disrespect Interplay, however.)
I hope the project succeeds... but I think, to do so, at least some consideration has to be given to this issue. It's not a question of "who doesn't like it: just leave it." I like it -- or at least, I like what I see so far, and I hope it succeeds. I'd love to see the project finish and a new, enhanced Descent come out. But in order for it to succeed, these questions need asked and answered.
