[Hendricks266]

Micky C, on 19 August 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

I heard you need to pay $100 a year to have an app on the App Store. I hope that's not the case for a free app.

Nope, you have to fork over the $100 or you can't even test your app on your own iDevice.

[Fox]

Microtransactions are not limited to free-to-play games. Which is a much bigger problem.

[Tea Monster]

100 bucks is the coffee budget for any kind of business or studio. It's solely a 'nuisance fee' to prevent bullshit posters and copycats.

[MetHy]

Comrade Major, on 19 August 2014 - 04:17 PM, said:

Except TF2 is none of the above... except for being free

Here is how it works in TF2 : there are tons of weapons or gear you can get. Some of those weapons are known for being more powerful, too. Then, you can either get them by spending sometimes HUNDREDS of hours in the game before getting the weapon you want and by building your stash little by little, and the stuff you get is completely randomized; OR you spend IRL money to get them right away.

It's EXACTLY the same concept as any free to play Facebook game.

[The Commander]

Hats ruined TF2...
TF Classic is where it's at.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

MetHy, on 20 August 2014 - 05:48 AM, said:

Here is how it works in TF2 : there are tons of weapons or gear you can get. Some of those weapons are known for being more powerful, too.

"Are known"? Hope you have proof to back that up; most of the TF2 weapons are fairly balanced that skill basically comes down to how well you play the class, not what loadout you have.

Quote

Then, you can either get them by spending sometimes HUNDREDS of hours in the game before getting the weapon you want and by building your stash little by little, and the stuff you get is completely randomized; OR you spend IRL money to get them right away.

It's EXACTLY the same concept as any free to play Facebook game.

Except it's not, because TF2 doesn't outright stop you from playing and ask you to spend more money or wait X days to continue, whereas the Facebook games you mention do. If you're going to argue this point, at least get your facts straight!

Your original post implied that TF2 had rampant product placement/advertising and outright crippling gameplay (reduced ammo pickups) unless you spent money. Are you now recanting that argument?

[MetHy]

Comrade Major, on 20 August 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:

"Are known"? Hope you have proof to back that up; most of the TF2 weapons are fairly balanced that skill basically comes down to how well you play the class, not what loadout you have.

Here is an example, back when I played nobody used the original Heavy weapon anymore, because the other one had more positive aspects than negative.
TF2 fucking sucks at weapon balance. By definition, a game that has SO MANY different weapons is really really fucking hard to be perfectly balanced, almost impossible. There is a reason why 'pro' TF2 leagues stick to a limited set of weapons.

Quote

Except it's not, because TF2 doesn't outright stop you from playing and ask you to spend more money or wait X days to continue, whereas the Facebook games you mention do. If you're going to argue this point, at least get your facts straight!

Dunno how it is now, but back then you could only get 5 random items per day. So yes, the limit is there. You can still continue to play sure, but you're not going to get anything more from it. It's exactly the same concept, things you can pay for to get immediatly, but if you want to get them normally you can only get them for a very limited amount of time every day.

Comrade Major, on 20 August 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:

Your original post implied that TF2 had rampant product placement/advertising and outright crippling gameplay (reduced ammo pickups) unless you spent money. Are you now recanting that argument?

Except I never said that. That was an imaginary example of the concept applied to Doom.

Dunno why you'd be so picky over this. Even if you like TF2 you can't deny the progression/money concept is exactly the same as free to play facebook games, everyone who plays the game sees that, some people like it, some people don't and keep playing the game trying not to mind that system, but nobody denies it.

[Steveeeie]

iTech, on 10 June 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

inflated ego

You said it.

[I should probably read the time stamos and not reply to months old posts]

[uraganotkirki]

If I may interject here, with my contemporary experience with TF2.

TF2's economy and model is the absolutely most fairest F2P system, and their "premium fee" is as low as $0.10 on any item, you get the same premium level as somebody who'd spend $100+, no more, no less. If you ever buy a weapon in TF2 - you are doing something wrong, they are so common place, that even if you don't have a friend who has 5 duplicates of it, one will come up either as unlock or as drop. The drop rate for all players is 12 per week.

TF2 is a living game, constantly being updated for 8 years and balanced based on a lot of factors, money is not one of them.

MetHy, on 20 August 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Here is an example, back when I played nobody used the original Heavy weapon anymore, because the other one had more positive aspects than negative.
TF2 fucking sucks at weapon balance. By definition, a game that has SO MANY different weapons is really really fucking hard to be perfectly balanced, almost impossible. There is a reason why 'pro' TF2 leagues stick to a limited set of weapons.

Having more than 400 matches in a competitive environment, I can tell how very, very wrong you are. There are whitelists for competitive matches removing certain weapons because TF2 is balanced for the public side of things where random damage spread, random bullet spread and critical hits are a thing.

Anybody who's played this game for more than 5 minutes and has a basic sense of game-balance would never say this, and I'm calling it out in particular, because the default minigun (just like all stock weapons are in 99% of the time) the best weapon to use. The are very few straight upgrades, and they are all 100% attainable and I can still justify using a weaker weapon because it has favourable statistics towards a different play style.

MetHy, on 20 August 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Dunno how it is now, but back then you could only get 5 random items per day. So yes, the limit is there. You can still continue to play sure, but you're not going to get anything more from it. It's exactly the same concept, things you can pay for to get immediatly, but if you want to get them normally you can only get them for a very limited amount of time every day.

The cap is for all players. The cap is not related to the unlockable via achievements items.
Yes, if you want items now and on the spot, you can: trade, unlock or buy them.

MetHy, on 20 August 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Dunno why you'd be so picky over this. Even if you like TF2 you can't deny the progression/money concept is exactly the same as free to play facebook games, everyone who plays the game sees that, some people like it, some people don't and keep playing the game trying not to mind that system, but nobody denies it.

We all deny it? TF2 doesn't even have progression, your chars never level up and the economy is centered around cosmetics, whereas Facebook games lock the game or halt it to a crawl unless you pay.
2 different worlds.


If you have questions about TF2, ask!

[Carl Winslow]

MetHy, on 20 August 2014 - 05:48 AM, said:

Here is how it works in TF2 : there are tons of weapons or gear you can get. Some of those weapons are known for being more powerful, too. Then, you can either get them by spending sometimes HUNDREDS of hours in the game before getting the weapon you want and by building your stash little by little, and the stuff you get is completely randomized; OR you spend IRL money to get them right away.

It's EXACTLY the same concept as any free to play Facebook game.

The weapons aren't more powerful, they're just an alternative to the base weapons. most of them are balanced around a specific playstyle or dealing a specific type of damage, like they'll do more to sentries but significantly less to players. all the extra stuff has drawbacks, and you don't have to spend jack shit to get them unless you really want to.
I'm also amazed that anyone would give a shit about 'only playing long enough to get the random items'. TF2 is a fun party game sort of FPS, and it has an absolute shit ton of player-made modes, maps, and goofy things to do. It's like you haven't actually played it ever.

[Idiotska]

The Angry Kiwi, on 20 August 2014 - 06:36 AM, said:

Hats ruined TF2...
TF Classic is where it's at.

Hats didn't ruin TF2.. no.. it's worse.

[DukeNukem64]

You once mentioned doing some 3D Realms merchandise etc.

Will you ever do an online shop or what?

[particle cannon]

this of course assuming 3dr has a future.

[MusicallyInspired]

Ok, you're starting to get annoying now. If you're going to badmouth something at least do it by Duke4 standards and have some actual arguments to back it up, rather than baseless empty passive aggressive statements that do nothing but reveal how spiteful and small you are. It's not hard, there's plenty to draw on. You're not even trying.

[Micky C]

I agree. While there's plenty of hate around here for everything, at the very least have some humour or originality about it.

For example; MusicallyInspired's avatar with the blue light sabre is lame, because blue is a passive colour.
I tried.
He makes good music though.

[Tea Monster]

TF2 is great when it's played the way it is supposed to be played.

What has ruined it is that just about nobody plays in a team though. It's generally a free-for-all with everyone just out for kills and nobody trying to get the objective. On top of that, you have mike spammers crying about how the only reason that you killed them is that they had a lag spike, mike-spammers generally crying, aim-botting snipers, mike-spamming 8 year olds swearing like sailors, 'friendlies' - more mike-spammers.

I pretty much gave up on the game after being kicked off a server twice for killing members of the opposite team who were conga-ing in front of their base instead of playing the damn game.

"Why did you kill me?"
"Gaben put this rocket launcher in my hand for a reason, As God is my witness, I'm going to use it!"

[cosmonautcowboy]

DukeNukem64, on 11 September 2016 - 07:07 AM, said:

You once mentioned doing some 3D Realms merchandise etc.

Will you ever do an online shop or what?

There are a few t-shirts available, but they're pretty simple cafe press style things, but the look of it:
https://3drealms.com/merch/

[MrFlibble]

With my interest in source ports recently renewed, I just thought that there is probably no reason why the Blake Stone games and the original Rise of the Triad shouldn't have official ports to Windows and other current systems.

BStone in its current state is quite well done (although it doesn't seem to have the option of playing in a window, which would be a nice addition), and WinROTT_GL appears almost 100% accurate in respect of the original game. At the same time Rise of the Triad certainly could use a more conservative (and functional) source port with the software renderer than the original WinROTT.

Anyways, I think that it would be nice if official ports were made which accurately represent these games but in high resolution, with optional improvements like:

• high-resolution version of title, main menu and loading screens
  
• high-resolution fonts for menus and interface
  
• high-resolution HUD graphics (theoretically it shouldn't be hard to do for any of these games, just keep the aspect ratio in mind)
  
• for Aliens of Gold, an option to use the higher-res weapon graphics from Planet Strike
  
• optionally bring back alternate female guards in Rise of the Triad - it is my understanding that this feature was cut solely because the game could not be optimized to run under minimum specs with it
  
• optional bots for Rise of the Triad multiplayer maps (this is already in WinROTT)
  
• alternate Rise of the Triad title screen

I wonder if there are high-res versions of the title screen and other art for Blake Stone and ROTT in Apogee/3D Realms archives? Could be useful to produce nice new screens for the ports.

What do you think?

[cybdmn]

MrFlibble, on 07 December 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

[*]optionally bring back alternate female guards in Rise of the Triad - it is my understanding that this feature was cut solely because the game could not be optimized to run under minimum specs with it

As far as i remember, they never finished the sprites for the female alternatives.

[TerminX]

I'm also not sure why anyone would want to use that obviously very WIP title screen for anything...

[Marphy Black]

cybdmn, on 07 December 2016 - 10:27 AM, said:

As far as i remember, they never finished the sprites for the female alternatives.

The unused alternate enemy variations were definitely completed and implemented. The female Low Guard and alternate High Guard appear in-game in this video:



Hendricks also posted this image a while back:

[K1n9_Duk3]

MrFlibble, on 07 December 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

With my interest in source ports recently renewed, I just thought that there is probably no reason why the Blake Stone games and the original Rise of the Triad shouldn't have official ports to Windows and other current systems.

I guess it all comes down to money. Why would they go through the trouble of creating (or even testing third party's) source ports when they can just use DOSBox or other emulators? They would probably also have to provide tech support for these ports if they were made "official" ports.

And then there are the legal issues. I have no idea who would have the right to make such a decision. Is it the new 3D Realms (who still sell these games), the new Apogee (who released RotT 2013 and the Planet Strike source code) or would it involve the original developers (JAM for Blake Stone series)? Does 3D Realms still own Rise of the Triad or do they merely have a license to sell the game (as with Commander Keen and Wolfenstein 3-D, for example)?

Don't get me wrong, I would like to see enhanced ports of the games with some of the features you described.

[MrFlibble]

K1n9_Duk3, on 07 December 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

I guess it all comes down to money. Why would they go through the trouble of creating (or even testing third party's) source ports when they can just use DOSBox or other emulators? They would probably also have to provide tech support for these ports if they were made "official" ports.

Well duh. Such ports as described above could add extra value to the product and allow them to re-release these games with a premium to their respective original DOS versions. Tech support could be delegated to GOG.com or whatever other vendors there are, considering that they do this kind of stuff already.

K1n9_Duk3, on 07 December 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

And then there are the legal issues. I have no idea who would have the right to make such a decision. Is it the new 3D Realms (who still sell these games), the new Apogee (who released RotT 2013 and the Planet Strike source code) or would it involve the original developers (JAM for Blake Stone series)? Does 3D Realms still own Rise of the Triad or do they merely have a license to sell the game (as with Commander Keen and Wolfenstein 3-D, for example)?

TBH I do not know the answers to these questions either, but I would suppose that copyright ownership issues would not pose much of a problem for building source ports of legally open-sourced games?

Well, I guess it's all up to fans now really. It's a pity though that in the recent years there doesn't seem to have been any work on a modern, accurate port of ROTT which uses the original software renderer.

Personally, considering that both Blake Stone and ROTT were overshadowed by their more popular contemporaries when they came out, I tend to think of any modern development for these games as their second chance of sorts. Running these games in high resolution significantly improves their visuals, and the option to switch to modern controls makes them accessible to a wider audience. Even if no extra features are added to the ports, they would allow for an improved experience compared to simply playing the same in DOSBox in low-res.

[Micky C]

Is there really that much demand for the really, really old dos games to justify it? From Doom onwards, games at least have some basic resemblance to modern shooters, but anything much before that and interest drops off pretty quickly IMO.

[K1n9_Duk3]

MrFlibble, on 08 December 2016 - 02:07 AM, said:

Well duh. Such ports as described above could add extra value to the product and allow them to re-release these games with a premium to their respective original DOS versions. Tech support could be delegated to GOG.com or whatever other vendors there are, considering that they do this kind of stuff already.

Yes, it's possible to re-release something as "Remastered", "Special Edition" or "World Tour", but creating such a product still costs money. Interceptor kinda did that when they did the iOS "port" of Duke2 and the Duke Nukem Platformer Pack for Steam, but I have no idea if they made any money with that. With relatively unknown games like Blake Stone and ROTT, there is probably little chance that a re-release would be profitable. I might buy it, but that might not be quite enough.

MrFlibble, on 08 December 2016 - 02:07 AM, said:

I would suppose that copyright ownership issues would not pose much of a problem for building source ports of legally open-sourced games?

Creating a source port is not the problem, as demonstrated by Bstone and WinROTT(GL). But you were talking about "official" source ports. What I meant is that I don't know who would have the rights to declare a port "official".

MrFlibble, on 08 December 2016 - 02:07 AM, said:

Well, I guess it's all up to fans now really. It's a pity though that in the recent years there doesn't seem to have been any work on a modern, accurate port of ROTT which uses the original software renderer.

Same here. The first time I used WinROTT would have been in 2005 or 2006. I think I was using WinROTT when I finally managed to play through the entire game for the first time. The version I used had flipped the left and right audio channels, which was just one of the many issues it had.

[MrFlibble]

Micky C, on 08 December 2016 - 03:52 AM, said:

Is there really that much demand for the really, really old dos games to justify it? From Doom onwards, games at least have some basic resemblance to modern shooters, but anything much before that and interest drops off pretty quickly IMO.

1. Both Blake Stone and ROTT came out after Doom (at least, the registered versions; AoG shareware v1.0 came out one week before Doom shareware, but who cares).
2. These games also have a "basic resemblance to modern shooters".
3. They are playable and enjoyable on their own, regardless of how well they fit modern conceptions of what an FPS game should or shouldn't be.

K1n9_Duk3, on 08 December 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

Yes, it's possible to re-release something as "Remastered", "Special Edition" or "World Tour", but creating such a product still costs money. Interceptor kinda did that when they did the iOS "port" of Duke2 and the Duke Nukem Platformer Pack for Steam, but I have no idea if they made any money with that. With relatively unknown games like Blake Stone and ROTT, there is probably little chance that a re-release would be profitable. I might buy it, but that might not be quite enough.

I think you're overemphasising the expenditures vs. profit dilemma. The DOS versions still sell, even if the revenue is a trickle (I've no idea). Creating a source port based on existing code doesn't seem like a very costly endeavour (especially since, unlike World Tour, there is no need to create any actually new content), and the added value of a port could very much boost the sales.

I have the impression that the situation in the market that emerged in the recent years is quite favourable for re-introducing old games to new players. It doesn't matter that Blake Stone and ROTT aren't as popular as other titles from the same time period. They are no worse, in terms of design and playablility, than the still popular Wolfenstein 3-D or Super 3D Noah's Ark which was re-launched recently.

I believe that the main factor here is not the amount of investment versus profit, but rather the willingness of the copyright holders/marketers to do such a thing in general. I have the impression that the new 3D Realms people care enough about the old games to make such official ports possible.

TerminX, on 07 December 2016 - 10:43 AM, said:

I'm also not sure why anyone would want to use that obviously very WIP title screen for anything...

It doesn't seem incomplete to me at all. Anyways, it could be used as a splash screen or a background for the launcher. It's a nice pic IMO.

[Hendricks266]

It's not a pic. The clouds move.

[MrFlibble]

Hendricks266, on 10 December 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

It's not a pic. The clouds move.

Cool to know that. I'm only familiar with the static screenshot from the IE preview, understandably.

Perhaps you know if the loading screen art with the HUNT team exists in a higher resolution?

[Hendricks266]

MrFlibble, on 10 December 2016 - 01:59 PM, said:

Cool to know that. I'm only familiar with the static screenshot from the IE preview, understandably.

Yeah, I should have thrown a in there.

MrFlibble, on 10 December 2016 - 01:59 PM, said:

Perhaps you know if the loading screen art with the HUNT team exists in a higher resolution?

If it does, I don't have it.

[MrFlibble]

I checked the official ROTT goodies pack, unfortunately the "high-resolution" wallpapers made from the title screen, loading screen and game over screen are all a product of simple nearest-neighbour scaling with aspect correction thrown in. If the real high-res art still existed by that point it was not used. Perhaps Joe has something in his archives?

If nothing else, an approximation of the title screen and menu background could be produced from this box scan, especially if someone happens to have it in lossless compression format (or can produce such image anew from the actual box). There's also a similar cover here, with the title font colour more resemblant of the in-game version. The scan quality isn't very good though.