Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!pacbell!well!farren
From: farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.games
Subject: Re: Eye of the Beholder
Keywords: 3000
Message-ID: <25043@well.sf.ca.us>
Date: 26 May 91 10:07:10 GMT
References: <726@digigw.digital.co.jp> <11356@mirsa.inria.fr> <24948@well.sf.ca.us> <11423@mirsa.inria.fr>
Lines: 28

colas@celeste.inria.fr (Colas Nahaboo) writes:

>In article <24948@well.sf.ca.us>, farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) writes:
>> [About EOB]
>> >It is just a copy of dungeon master. 
>> What a bunch of crap.  They stole the user interface from FTL?  Not bloody
>> likely - if you're going that direction, then FTL stole their user interface
>> from Wizardry.  DM was good, but hardly a "masterpiece".

>DM closer to wizardy than EOB ?
>Come on, don't drink and post, Mike :-)

Well, I don't shee why I shouldn't, thish late at night :-)

I didn't say that DM was closer to Wizardry than it was to EOB.  I said that
BOTH of those games derive their basic operation from Wizardry (or, possibly,
something even before that - Wizardry was the first D&D type game I played,
some ten years ago).  There isn't all that much that's unique about the
DM user interface.  I admit, there's a lot more detail implemented in the
game itself, but I've seen every single concept used in DM long before, in
one game or another.

DM is a fine game, no doubt about it (except for the damn copy protection,
which makes it impossible for me to put onto my hard drive - the version I've
got will NOT work with the PD hacks).  But it isn't a work of genius, it
isn't a masterpiece.
-- 
Mike Farren 				     farren@well.sf.ca.us