Today, in the SDL newsgroup ...

All other topics around Descent and D2X-XL

Moderators: Frustikus, simX, Aus-RED-5

User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Today, in the SDL newsgroup ...

Postby karx11erx » Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:26 pm

Donny Viszneki wrote:I'm saying I can't relate to the desire to play classic games with "enhanced" multimedia (ie. "hi-res textures" and "hi-res sound.")

It's partially an issue of nostalgia: I want to reproduce the experience I had with the game when I originally played it.

But it's also probably simply an artistic issue: The multimedia in my favorite classic games was designed carefully! If you asked the original authors to update the multimedia for more modern computers, it would certainly take more time than what is typically put into these "hi-res" media packs. It takes hard work and ingenuity to translate conventional artistic talent into the low fidelity formats that work for resource constrained gaming platforms, do you think you can just pluck that careful work out of its intended context, smooth some edges, and get something of higher quality? I think not.


karx11erx wrote:As this boils down to indirect criticism of the features of D2X-XL, may I ask whether you know the sounds and hires textures of D2X-XL, or the other features of this program?

Because currently you sound like you are just posting from theory without really knowing what you are talking about.

As far as your die hard nostalgia goes: I suppose you never play any newer sequel of an old classic you loved then? Because that would inevitably stray from the experience you had when you first played the game.

Dude, until you prove otherwise I really think that your above remark is plain and simply clueless. I am working on D2X-XL and DLE-XP (D1+D2 level editor) for at least 5 years (actually lost track of it). I probably know this program and workings better than the original authors. I have rewritten a great part of the code (which was a mess), and added a lot of new code.

Do you think you can tell me anything about the validity of my efforts and of all the contributors of sounds, textures, new game models and levels, and whether they convey the original spirit of this game with rejuvenated and improved graphics?

You may be playing Descent to see it in all it's pixelated originality to recall some feelings you had when you were way younger. Many people play D2X-XL because they want to have the original, awesome gameplay of Descent with at least somewhat modern graphics and effects.

To be open: I don't think that there is anything you can tell me about my all time favorite game, about the effort that went into it, and most of all about what makes Descent Descent. As far as I am concerned: Descent is made Descent by its gameplay in the first place, not by its graphics. That's why so many Descent 1 players don't even like Descent 2, and many Descent 1 and 2 players don't like Descent 3. It's because of gameplay issues, not because of the graphics. The argument that a game is made by its graphics is either poor in itself, or the game is a poor game.

I am a professional software developer and in the programming business for almost 30 years. Sure, D2X-XL could be better or even need another engine. That doesn't mean I don't know my business though. It just means I don't have that much time (or texture, sound, model and level artists at hand).

Now before you even reply: Go get the current D2X-XL version *plus* hires content and play it! There's a very stable beta release of the latest version available (see www.descent2.de/forum).

karx


Actually Donny Viszneki's post boils down to clueless prejudices packaged in educated wording.
Sirius
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Postby Sirius » Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:39 am

I think he overestimates how talented the Parallax developers were. Sure, they had to work around some pretty tight restrictions, but the game art isn't that outstanding even considering.
User avatar
Yokelassence
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2008 1:54 am
Location: That country full of sheep.

Postby Yokelassence » Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:32 am

Can we have a link to the original discussion? As I am trying to understand how these statements originated, sound to me like this Donny fellow is excusing himself from D2X-XL...all because of the presence of retouched sounds and textures.

Did anyone mention that the hi-res content is optional?
-Core i5 4690 3.5Ghz--GTX 1070 8GB--16GB DDR3 800--Z97 Extreme4--512GB SSD/2TB HDD--Zalman Z11 case-

Old PC that no longer turns on. May it R.I.P:
-Core 2 Duo E8500 3.2Ghz--HD4850 512MB--4GB DDR2-800--Gigabyte EP45-DS3L--640GB Storage--Antec 300 Case-
Ben K
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:21 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Postby Ben K » Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:26 am

There was no "hard work" or "ingenuity" going into the artwork for Descent.
User avatar
Yoshimitsu
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:58 am
Location: Upstate New York United States
Contact:

Postby Yoshimitsu » Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:41 am

D2X-XL looks almost exactly like the original Descent 1& 2 except that it doesn't make your eyes tear up from pixillation. Aside from that, the gameplay hasn't changed at all and that's definitely what matters most.
Windows XP home edition (Service Pack 3 plus all updates)
Asrock Dual Series Motherboard
Onboard Sound (ALC888 Audio Codec) Using Realtek HD Audio Drivers
Intel Core 2 Duo 6400 (2.13Ghz)
2GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 4850
User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Postby karx11erx » Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:32 am

Ben K wrote:There was no "hard work" or "ingenuity" going into the artwork for Descent.


:lolol:

Yeah, he wrote back and said he was writing from a completely general point of view. To which I replied that he wrote in the context of Descent, so his remarks were hard not to be related and D2X-XL.

Anyway, he says he will try D2X-XL now.

One of the hilarious things about his above post is that the current hires sounds simply are resampled versions of the standards sounds - they cannot possibly stray from the original aural experience of Descent 2.
User avatar
Berzerk
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 10:54 pm
Location: Alberta, Canada
Contact:

Postby Berzerk » Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:18 pm

His argument is the whole reason why Oblivion stunk. They thought grapics = gameplay. It is also the reason why Final Fantasy games went down hill.
Ben K
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:21 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Postby Ben K » Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:01 pm

Hehehe. There's some irony to that.

Oblivion had some cutting-edge (for the time) vegetation and graphical systems, but the artwork was sub-par and the faces were a hash. With gameplay included, the whole thing felt like a beta.
User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Postby karx11erx » Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:28 pm

Oblivion - wasn't that the successor to Elder Scrolls? And that had already been a broken game - or an unfinished one, if you prefer.
Ben K
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:21 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Postby Ben K » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:16 am

Elder Scrolls 4, in fact.
Sirius
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Postby Sirius » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:34 am

Elder Scrolls 3 was Morrowind, and you might be right about the stability of that. I never played it but some of the things I heard, well ... yeah...

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests