Descent to Undermountain

20 views
Skip to first unread message

sjjn

unread,
Jan 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/17/98
to

Does anyone know where to find Georges? I've killed everything and everybody
in the place but non Big G. I've gotten the diamond, found the goblins, and
ound a blue portal that doesn't seem to do anything. Can anyone gove
directions to the guy or did I waste him already.....

Tim Bartley

unread,
Jan 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/17/98
to

go to the room where you found the ring of protection +1, he is through a
illusionary wall three panels over talk to him. I hope this helps you
sjjn wrote in message <69rldm$mp6$1...@broadway.interport.net>...

Steve Rheaume

unread,
Jan 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/18/98
to

>go to the room where you found the ring of protection +1, he is through a
>illusionary wall three panels over talk to him. I hope this helps you
>sjjn wrote in message <69rldm$mp6$1...@broadway.interport.net>...

>>Does anyone know where to find Georges?

i got stuck on this one too. i've already found that +1 ring, but i forget
where i found it. which part of the lair is that? thanks.

steve


slink

unread,
Jan 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/19/98
to

In the big apartment that you get to through the wicker wall in the
bathing area in one side of that room where all the thieves were on
both sides of you as you went towards the other end. There are a
couple of secret doors involved, and the hallway to the apartment
itself whispers a lot.

Sandra -> http://www.netins.net/showcase/slink/
GEEK CODE Version 3.12: GS>AT !d(++)@ s:+ a+ C+++($) !U(C/H$) P(+)@
L E? W++ N++ o? K? w(++)@ O !M V(+) PS+() PE(++)@ Y+ PGP? t++@ 5? X?
R+ tv-- b++(++++)@ DI++++ D G e++++ h+(++)($) r+++ x+++

fLasHbAk

unread,
Jan 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/19/98
to

Well, I'm running around in the thieves lair and I have a few comments about
the game.
1)Where are all the other character classes? Most notably missing from our
choices are Rangers and Paladins. Not too mention acrobats, bards,
cavaliers, barbarians, illusionists and the like. Not really a complaint,
but I just would like to know why they were left out.
2)There are some real technical flaws with the engine. I sent email to
interplay Dec. 21, 1997 and still havent revieced a response. I had
included some screenshots of monsters and loot just floating in the air and
was curious if this would be fixed.
3)What version of the "Descent" engine was used to create this game?
Granted, graphics are not the most important part of a role playing game,
but let's be honest here. The screenshots on Dragonplay are not indicative
of the final release (supposedly shots from alpha version are there, why
does the alpha look better than the final?) I went and re-installed descent
and got all of the patches for it so that the engine was as updated as
possible. The original descent engine looked better and reacted better even
before the patches than dtu and I, again, was curious as to why?
4) The story seems ok and am looking forward to finishing the game I would
just like to know why is it that we, unlike the other genres, must
consistently deal with subpar software as the C&C clone and Quake Clone
businesses are booming. I hear that it's because of development times and
costs etc but where interplay is concerned I think that it's a bunch of bull
sh^t. Especially from a company that without RPG's they would've been
nothing. Wasn't it the Bard's Tale Series that started Interplay off (then
being published by Electronic Arts) and showed the Interplay team as a group
of talented and creative individuals?? Correct me if I am wrong. Now let me
ask What Happened??????? Fallout was great, Baldur's Gate looks to be
incredible (not really an interplay title, but a bio-ware title, right?) So
why does DTU look like something that SSi would've published back in the
early 90's and ended up with the License being jerked away. Again just
curious...
Though I am rather disappointed with this title I hope that interplay will
add to it in order to make it a little better. It is a sad thing when a
possibly great title is destroyed because of business and straight BS that
weakens a gamers view of a company.
Who was in charge of this project? Have you gotten the crack pipe unstuck
from his lips yet???

Mark Asher

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

"fLasHbAk" <flas...@juno.com> wrote:

snip

>Though I am rather disappointed with this title I hope that interplay will
>add to it in order to make it a little better. It is a sad thing when a
>possibly great title is destroyed because of business and straight BS that
>weakens a gamers view of a company.
>Who was in charge of this project? Have you gotten the crack pipe unstuck
>from his lips yet???

Unfortunately, Interplay has not responded to criticisms of this game.
This piece of drek has all the earmarks of being a dump and run title.
It's unlikely that they will spend any more money on this title. They
knew full well that it was a stinker and released it anyway.

What amuses me is that they silently released it about two weeks
before Xmas. No press release that I ever saw or heard of, and they
waited appox. a month to send out review copies of the game, thereby
ensuring that there would be no quick reviews panning it at any of the
commercial websites or gaming mags. By the time we see any reviews of
this game, it will have been out for 6 weeks and its sales cycle will
be over. People insist that this is a coincidence. Perhaps, but a
rather convienent one, don't you think? Gee, for Earth 2140 they had a
whole website promotion going. For DTUM even Interplay employees
didn't get copies.

From now on for Interplay games, demand a playable demo before buying
the game. They have abused our trust. Meghan, if you're listening,
please explain to me the error in my thinking here.

Mark Asher

burn2157

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

Not only did Interplay know how bad DTUM was, certain people at TSR knew
also. Check some of the posts at the Tavern Forum at Interplay's
website. Many people have emailed them and WOTC . And as for a
playable demo: there was (and still is) one for DTUM. It was released
over a year ago. It was a pre-alpha version of the game. You can get
the demo off of the cd that came with the January 97 issue of CGW - if
by chance you bought that issue. It's not listed as a demo on the cd.
You can find it by exploring the cd. The sad thing is it ran at a better
framerate and had better AI than the full version. And before anyone
says it, YES I PLAYED BOTH OF THEM. >: ) Not only that, but it had
working multi-player support. Some people that were regulars at the
Tavern Forum even played it over Kali - I think it was Kali. Anyway,
they successfully played the multi-player part of it. Check the
archived posts at the Tavern Forum if you want to read what they had to
say for yourself. Check around Jan. of last year - maybe a little
later. The thing I still don't know is what did they do in the year or
so after they decided to redo the game in SVGA. The pre-alpha demo
looks just about as good as the final version. And the pre-alpha demo
was before they redone the game. Interplay really missed the mark with
this game.

burn2157

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

You want to know why there is no Ranger class. Well, I can remeber
asking that same question on the Tavern Forum at Interplay's site a LONG
time ago - like maybe towards the end of '96 (or early last year) when
DTUM was SUPPOSED to come out. (Damn, I can remeber having it
pre-ordered in Oct. 96. What a mistake that was! I won't do that
again.) The response I got was that it was too hard to implement the
Ranger class. (That should tell you how long it has been. I actually
got a response from Interplay.) I should have seen it back then. They
were really setting there goals high. If it is too hard to do, we won't
do it. I guess that went for AI, beta testing to find bugs, check for
framerate when level designing, finishing multi-player support, etc.
Way to go Interplay. What are they going to do with the AD&D (Forgotten
Realms) license? If it wasn't for Bioware, I guess they would put out
another third rate product. They shouldn't even do another AD&D game.
Spare us. Have mercy. I can't stand anymore!


fLasHbAk wrote:

Mark Asher

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

burn2157 <burn...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Not only did Interplay know how bad DTUM was, certain people at TSR knew
>also. Check some of the posts at the Tavern Forum at Interplay's
>website. Many people have emailed them and WOTC . And as for a
>playable demo: there was (and still is) one for DTUM. It was released
>over a year ago. It was a pre-alpha version of the game. You can get
>the demo off of the cd that came with the January 97 issue of CGW - if
>by chance you bought that issue. It's not listed as a demo on the cd.
>You can find it by exploring the cd. The sad thing is it ran at a better
>framerate and had better AI than the full version. And before anyone
>says it, YES I PLAYED BOTH OF THEM. >: ) Not only that, but it had
>working multi-player support. Some people that were regulars at the
>Tavern Forum even played it over Kali - I think it was Kali. Anyway,
>they successfully played the multi-player part of it. Check the
>archived posts at the Tavern Forum if you want to read what they had to
>say for yourself. Check around Jan. of last year - maybe a little
>later. The thing I still don't know is what did they do in the year or
>so after they decided to redo the game in SVGA. The pre-alpha demo
>looks just about as good as the final version. And the pre-alpha demo
>was before they redone the game. Interplay really missed the mark with
>this game.

Some kind of scam was worked. Either Interplay was paying someone or
some team to develop this game and they completely dropped the ball
but kept bullshitting Interplay, or else Interplay themselves kept
screwing it up -- who knows. This looks like a game that was abandoned
and resurrected to make some quick Xmas cash.

Some people at Interplay knew how bad this was and decided to release
it. They should be ashamed.

Mark Asher

Meghan Jenks (Interplay)

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 06:19:28 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:

>Unfortunately, Interplay has not responded to criticisms of this game.
>This piece of drek has all the earmarks of being a dump and run title.
>It's unlikely that they will spend any more money on this title. They
>knew full well that it was a stinker and released it anyway.

Sorry, been running around six ways to Sunday with other titles. I
can respond about DTU now since I got my copy last week; it's pretty
much what I expected from reading the group. The story is there, the
gameplay is there, but the graphics do look dated and the engine is
quirky. I'm told they were unable to get past things like bodies
defying the laws of gravity. I even saw the twitching feet (I thought
it was funny.. as soon as I'd get close they'd start.
*twitchtwitchtwitch*). Had I not heard about it from usenet I don't
know if I would have found it as funny, though.

Development thought that the story and gameplay were tight enough to
ship it, and that the engine was solid enough as well. Apprently
their enough and the public's enough are not the same. :( They're
disappointed with what they're hearing, but who wouldn't be? They
didn't expect critical acclaim by any means, but they didn't expect to
see several years' work get slammed as nothing either.

>What amuses me is that they silently released it about two weeks
>before Xmas. No press release that I ever saw or heard of, and they
>waited appox. a month to send out review copies of the game, thereby
>ensuring that there would be no quick reviews panning it at any of the
>commercial websites or gaming mags. By the time we see any reviews of
>this game, it will have been out for 6 weeks and its sales cycle will
>be over. People insist that this is a coincidence. Perhaps, but a
>rather convienent one, don't you think? Gee, for Earth 2140 they had a
>whole website promotion going. For DTUM even Interplay employees
>didn't get copies.

I will continue to tell you how it happened. How many times do I have
to repeat this, Mark? You keep making the same speculations and I
keep telling you how it happened. We don't receive the same games
that go to the stores. The ones that are sent out to the press, and
which I get a copy of, are a different NFR build. This is not the
first time our copies have been delayed. You mentioned Earth 2140 and
guess what? It took forever for us to get copies of that too to send
to the press. Earth 2140 also has a completely different Director of
Marketing, marketing manager, and PR manager than DTUM. Earth 2140
came from FlatKat, the Strategy division. DTUM is from our strategy
division. Earth 2140 had 0 awareness when we got the title, because
we had 4 months to market and ship it. Most of the push was online,
so it got an online contest while DTUM had print ads run for quite a
bit of its development. Apples and oranges, my friend. We received
our copies of DTUM last Tuesday. Thursday the press release and
product went out. It's already been discussed at meetings what to do
when your copies don't show up - apparently DTUM should have been
built and shipped to us at right around the same time it went to
stores but like too many other titles in the last several months, it
sat in the warehouse.

Let's dispel another myth here as far as timing. DTUM was sent for
duplication on 12/16. On 12/17 and 12/18, the PR and marketing staff
were at off-site quarterly meetings. On 12/19, the PR and marketing
staff came back to Interplay and packed up their offices to move, then
were given the rest of the day off, then were off until 12/29. Then
they had to catch up on almost 2 weeks. Then half the company was out
sick for an average of probably 3 days. I know that I and the PR
person for the action division were out for that entire week. I know
the RPG PR manager was out, but I don't know for how long since I
wasn't here. The press release has been ready to go, but is sent out
with full product which WE DIDN'T HAVE.

Hello? You can ask me to tell you what happened 100 times and I will
tell you what happened, 100 times. So far we're on 4 or 5. Let's not
keep going, I'm about to just start cutting and pasting. Despite what
you may think of DTUM, please give *me* credit for integrity. I'd
really appreciate it. :)

>From now on for Interplay games, demand a playable demo before buying
>the game. They have abused our trust. Meghan, if you're listening,
>please explain to me the error in my thinking here.

That's absolutely your prerogative and an all-around good idea no
matter which company's games you're looking into.

Meghan

=====================================================================
Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
Check out the Earth 2140 online game! *** http://www.earth2140.com
For online happenings, see http://www.interplay.com/events/index.html

burn2157

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

Mark Asher wrote:

I have been followings progress (of lack of) of DTUM since around the
end of '96 when it was originally supposed to come out. I remeber
certain posts that were made at Interplay's Tavern Forum. Read this
one:

http://www.dragonplay.com/tavern/messages/4074.html

Posted by Reginald at Interplay on August 19, 1997 at 06:43:44:

Hey Guys,
I know this message is LONG overdue. For that, I sincerely
apologize. We have been really busy trying to get the game done and
unfortunately, I've neglected letting you guys know what’s going on.
As you know, multi-player support was killed from the product and
you guys deserve an explanation why. I picked up DTU about 6 months
ago and found a game that was seriously in trouble. To make a long
story short, there were a lot of programming problems and inherent
design flaws that needed to be overcome before we could consider
it a game. The team and I spent a long time figuring out what
options we had and how long they would to take to accomplish given
that we were told to get the game out this year.
These were our options:

Do a product that had a half-assed single player game and a
half-assed multi-player game.

OR

Do a product that had a good single player game and hope the
company would let us do a patch that let us make a multi-player
patch.

We went with the second choice. And yes, once we made this
decision, we knew that we would receive hell from the gaming
community. The last thing we wanted to do was release a game that
nobody liked because the overall quality sucked. We want to deliver
a quality product in the time allocated and we couldn't do it if
we added multi-player support. For those who have been completely
let down by this decision, I sincerely apologize and hope that
you will take a second look at our game if we do a multi-player
patch. For the patient ones that are still listening,
I thank you, and will post up what kind of single player game
you can expect when we finish the game.

Reginald Arnedo
Interplay Productions

This means that at around Feb. of last year the game still was in
ruins. It was supposed to have been released in Oct. of 96! What did
they do to this game? It appears that he found a game in trouble and
the left it there. Instead of makine a good single player game, they
made a "a half-assed single player game" and NO multi-player game. And
releasing it around Dec. was a way to cut losses. Face it, with this
game, it was lets get it out now or never. Better to cut losses and
release a poor product (at Christmas) than sink anymore money into it. I
don't see them doing any major changes to this game. They'll move on to
the Planescape game and try to forget about DTUM. There was also a post
about 3dfx support. I'll try to find that one. Back then, it seems
that 3dfx support might be possible. But now, it seems as if it is out
of the question.


Mark Asher

unread,
Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98
to

mje...@interplay.com (Meghan Jenks (Interplay)) wrote:

>On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 06:19:28 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
>>Unfortunately, Interplay has not responded to criticisms of this game.
>>This piece of drek has all the earmarks of being a dump and run title.
>>It's unlikely that they will spend any more money on this title. They
>>knew full well that it was a stinker and released it anyway.
>
>Sorry, been running around six ways to Sunday with other titles. I
>can respond about DTU now since I got my copy last week; it's pretty
>much what I expected from reading the group. The story is there, the
>gameplay is there, but the graphics do look dated and the engine is
>quirky. I'm told they were unable to get past things like bodies
>defying the laws of gravity. I even saw the twitching feet (I thought
>it was funny.. as soon as I'd get close they'd start.
>*twitchtwitchtwitch*). Had I not heard about it from usenet I don't
>know if I would have found it as funny, though.

So are there plans to patch the game and its "quirky" engine? Add 3DFX
support? Or is the game being orphaned?

>Development thought that the story and gameplay were tight enough to
>ship it, and that the engine was solid enough as well. Apprently
>their enough and the public's enough are not the same. :( They're
>disappointed with what they're hearing, but who wouldn't be? They
>didn't expect critical acclaim by any means, but they didn't expect to
>see several years' work get slammed as nothing either.

If they thought the engine was solid enough to ship. They've got
pretty low standards. Is this the type of QC we can expect from now
on?

I don't doubt your integrity. But someone at Interplay greenlighted
this title, and that person's integrity is suspect. Meghan, this game
is getting endcap treatment and is being featured in ads from
companies like CompUSA and Best Buy. Don't you think that pushing this
crappy game onto the public kind of sucks? How much respect should we
have for Interplay for doing this?

Anyone that woke up Xmas morning and unwrapped DTUM was essentially
getting a lump of coal.

Mark Asher

Mark Asher

unread,
Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98
to

burn2157 <burn...@hotmail.com> wrote:

snip

Interesting stuff. So the game was a shambles early this year, and
Interplay tried to rescue it. So instead of cutting their losses, they
poured more money into it.

It's easy to see what happened. Instead of doing a rewrite from
scratch, which would take longer, they kept trying to work with a big
pile of code that was probably crap. When you start with crap, it's
hard to turn it into gold.

I'm just upset that Interplay -- by gamers, for gamers, remember? --
saw fit to recoup some of their losses by pushing this game out the
door. Thanks, Interplay, for doing the right thing.

Mark Asher


Cmdr Krud

unread,
Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98
to

Mark Asher wrote in message <34c5b4ee...@news.primary.net>...

>
>I'm just upset that Interplay -- by gamers, for gamers, remember? --
>saw fit to recoup some of their losses by pushing this game out the
>door. Thanks, Interplay, for doing the right thing.


From their point of view, why shouldn't they deliberately release a lousy
game? Take 2 got away with it and it's been downhill for the industry ever
since.

-Krud

Mike Simpson

unread,
Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98
to

On Sat, 17 Jan 1998 20:23:38 -0500, "sjjn" <sj...@interport.net> wrote:

>Does anyone know where to find Georges? I've killed everything and everybody
>in the place but non Big G. I've gotten the diamond, found the goblins, and
>ound a blue portal that doesn't seem to do anything. Can anyone gove
>directions to the guy or did I waste him already.....
>
>

Best thing to do in uninstall it. That, at least, should work.


Mike Simpson
-Can you say Umberto Eco? It's less filling:^)
-ICQ #543245
-Remove NoSPaM to email-

mieu

unread,
Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98
to

>. The story is there, the
>gameplay is there, but the graphics do look dated and the engine is
>quirky. I'm told they were unable to get past things like bodies
>defying the laws of gravity. I even saw the twitching feet (I thought
>it was funny.. as soon as I'd get close they'd start.
>*twitchtwitchtwitch*). Had I not heard about it from usenet I don't
>know if I would have found it as funny, though.
>
>Development thought that the story and gameplay were tight enough to
>ship it, and that the engine was solid enough as well. Apprently
>their enough and the public's enough are not the same. :( They're
>disappointed with what they're hearing, but who wouldn't be? They
>didn't expect critical acclaim by any means, but they didn't expect to
>see several years' work get slammed as nothing either.

So what is going to done about it as the above statement is a virtual
admission that the game WAS put out substandard! IS there going to be
a patch to improve the graphics, a simple yeah or nay will suffice.
pleeease....just once can we have a straight answer instead of the
"oooh, i say, it is bad is'ent it?"attitude of the above comments that
tell us absolutely nothing except the fact that you agree with what's
been said by this NG. Give us a straight answer and we can all forget
about this game and go onto something else. A possible buyer await's.
Thank you, bye,bye

MIEU DRAGON.

/>
/< "What news Corwin?
0@00\\\\\[]}UDIC}====================-
\< Thy lie shall have
\> brought thee low".


Khengis

unread,
Jan 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/22/98
to

ooooooh... I never saw anything such as that before... Nice one
posting that old message from Interplay. I have defended DTUM to some
degree here in the newsgroups... but I must say, after reading that
message, I am a trifle steamed now. Nay.. check that.. upon thinking
about it.. I'm pretty disgusted.

Shame... shame... shame... I will, as I know others will, long
remember this in the annals of gaming...

That said.. I bet you if BG or whatever else comes up next from
Interplay is a great game, most everyone will go out and buy it
anyhow. Boycotts don't work with gamers. :)

Lar

John M Clancy

unread,
Jan 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/22/98
to

burn2157 wrote:
> I have been followings progress (of lack of) of DTUM since around the
> end of '96 when it was originally supposed to come out. I remeber
> certain posts that were made at Interplay's Tavern Forum. Read this
> one:
>
> http://www.dragonplay.com/tavern/messages/4074.html
>
> Posted by Reginald at Interplay on August 19, 1997 at 06:43:44:
>
> Hey Guys,
> I know this message is LONG overdue. For that, I sincerely
> apologize. We have been really busy trying to get the game done and
> unfortunately, I've neglected letting you guys know what’s going on.
> As you know, multi-player support was killed from the product and
> you guys deserve an explanation why. I picked up DTU about 6 months
> ago and found a game that was seriously in trouble. To make a long
> story short, there were a lot of programming problems and inherent
> design flaws that needed to be overcome before we could consider
> it a game. The team and I spent a long time figuring out what
> options we had and how long they would to take to accomplish given

> that we were told to get the game out this year.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^!!

That says it all. Right there. I can see the accountant
at his computer screen "It's been in production how long?"
"Release it!, we've lost too much money on it!"

Games for gamers by gamers? Hmmm, Interplay I think you
need to change your slogan. Would a gamer do this to
another gamer? (OK well maybe if real life were UO.) :)

> These were our options:
>
> Do a product that had a half-assed single player game and a
> half-assed multi-player game.
>
> OR
>
> Do a product that had a good single player game and hope the
> company would let us do a patch that let us make a multi-player
> patch.

> We went with the second choice. And yes, once we made this
> decision, we knew that we would receive hell from the gaming
> community. The last thing we wanted to do was release a game that
> nobody liked because the overall quality sucked.

Hmmm? What was that? What did you say? Say that again please.

> The last thing we wanted to do was release a game that
> nobody liked because the overall quality sucked.

That's what I thought you said. If that's the case, then why
did you do it?

> We want to deliver
> a quality product in the time allocated and we couldn't do it if
> we added multi-player support. For those who have been completely
> let down by this decision, I sincerely apologize and hope that
> you will take a second look at our game if we do a multi-player
> patch.

Hard to take a second look since you're not doing a multi-player
patch isn't it?

> For the patient ones that are still listening,
> I thank you, and will post up what kind of single player game
> you can expect when we finish the game.
>
> Reginald Arnedo
> Interplay Productions

How about this for a slogan: " by money grubbing bastards
for a quick buck." Hmm, not very catchy but it won't get you
sued for false advertising.


--
John M Clancy aka MeleKahn aka Poison
"The whole world is crazy, except for you and me,
and I'm not too sure about you."

Khengis

unread,
Jan 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/23/98
to

On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 14:38:51 -0600, burn2157 <burn...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Yeah, it would be REALLY hard to boycott Baldur's Gate. I need a good
>AD&D crpg! ; ) Besides, I don't think we'll have the same problems
>with BG as DTUM. The one thing I didn't like hearing was that Interplay
>is doind the beta testing for BG. They SURE didn't do a good job with
>DTUM - if they even tested it.

Nods on that. But, ya know, in retrospect, I will also have to add
that DTUM compared to Battlespire isn't tooo terrible a game. I found
Battlespire to get boring real fast. The multiplayer option in that
game might as well have been left out, as it plays chunky, and you can
not save a multiplayer character. So, what's the point? Battlespire
is, on the whole, a worse crpg than DTUM, in my opinion.

Baldur's Gate appears to be the only crpg I have to look forward to.
I'm not that excited about Diablo 2 (which we may not see for another
year or so). I get a creeping feeling that Diablo 2 will be pretty
much Diablo with few inovations...especially considering the great
deal of time they have set aside to work on it.

The Baldur's Gate quick time movie was okay... but I would have liked
to have seen a bit more of the combat segments in the video, as I have
a feeling I will be seeing plenty of it within the game. One thing I
found humurous was the quantity of blood that shot forth from victims.
heh, it seemed like every blow must have caught the poor sots in the
juglar vein. Reminded me a little of the blood bath that was in Myth.
I'm not complaing, mind you... just saying I thought it looked kind of
funny.

Lar

Corpus Callosum

unread,
Jan 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/23/98
to

> over a year ago. It was a pre-alpha version of the game. You can get
> the demo off of the cd that came with the January 97 issue of CGW - if
> by chance you bought that issue. It's not listed as a demo on the cd.
> You can find it by exploring the cd. The sad thing is it ran at a better
> framerate and had better AI than the full version. And before anyone
> says it, YES I PLAYED BOTH OF THEM. >: ) Not only that, but it had
> working multi-player support. Some people that were regulars at the
> Tavern Forum even played it over Kali - I think it was Kali. Anyway,
> they successfully played the multi-player part of it. Check the

Does anyone know where to download this demo?
I'd love to see the multiplayer, as that was one of the things I was
looking forward to most about the game. I bought it and am taking it back
tomorrow. Unbelievabley bad framerate in a box as small as Ultima
Underworld 2, yet THIS on my 233!


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages