Top 10 reasons why ADOM is better than Nethack
Warren Cheung
I thought I'd let people take a look at what's kept me here and not
anywhere else (like developing Angband <G>). And as a shameless plug
for Nethack (and thereby indirectly SLASH'EM).
I won't presume to say anything about ADOM...suffice to say at one point
I downloaded it, got terribly confused starting a character, and the
interface was just so...unNethacklike...that I had to stop.
I think playing Nethack in my youth has prevented me from playing
anything else. Which isn't a loss for ME, let's just say. I'm
perfectly happy where I am <G>.
Chan Hoong Keong wrote:
> 10. Adom is new, Nethack is old
Rightly so! Nethack has had a rich and full history. The DevTeam has
always had a chock-full batch of surprises for us every time they unveil
their latest and greatest. I have a feeling that Nethack is far from
decrepit. More like a fine cheese, that's had the benefit of years of
experience. ;B
Often, newer games haveflashy new features - graphics, sound and the
like. Nethack may not always seem to be the cutting edge of
technology, but what it does, it does with incredible polish.
Examples, examples. Take things like the VISION code. Variable sized
light sources. Doorway clipping, invisible and see invisible...the list
goes on and on...
And as for graphics and sound effects...well...let's say that even
though 16x16x16color tiles may not be the state of the art, they more
than do their job effectively.
> 9. Adom has more classes than Nethack
Of course <G>. But the emphasis in Nethack is making each class
different. Little moments where being a certain class makes all the
difference. Sure, it may not have all the variety, but often, there
are those little touches. Like apples for starting healers...
> 8. Adom has more skills than Nethack
> 7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
Very true. But then, skills are a rather recent addition to Nethack's
game system. Most of the actions however are linked to the Attributes,
rather than to increasing the skills.
I have it from a good source that _someone_ is thinking about this...
> 6. Adom has level and class specific special power, Nethack hasn't
SLASH and its ilk have had "special powers". But then again, Nethack
has had its knights jumping, and priestly undead turning.
As for gaining more specials with levels...I hear someone's thinking of
that...
> 5. Adom has mushroom, Nethack has mold
And grenades. I mean eggs ;B But seriously, there are your cans of
spinach. And your tinning kits.
> 4. Adom has multiple quests, Nethack has only 1
Not technically true. Each class has a different quest. Then you add
the Gnomish Mines, Vlad's Tower...
Then there's the Sokoban levels...which DOS players can now play...it's
quite fun :B
> 3. Adom has Chaos power, Nethack has nothing
Intrinsics. Maybe you can't invoke them, but they're mighty handy with
that red dragon breathing down your neck <G>
> 2. Adom has multiple ways to win, Nethack has only 1
Well, Ascenscion is one. There's always escaping as the alternative...
> 1. Adom is much easier than Nethack!!!
That depends. Since I was raised on Nethack, my attempts to try other
roguelikes have all ended in...extreme frustration. It's just not the
same.
--
WACko
Homepage:
http://wac.cjb.net or http://wac.home.ml.org
SLASH'EM (Game Indev):
http://slashem.cjb.net or http//slashem.home.ml.org
Chan Hoong Keong
7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
--
Email : hkc...@hkchan.pc.my
LAdams6664
>From: Warren Cheung
#1 reason why nethack is better than ADOM:
Nethackers don't go throwing insults at ADOM players on their newsgroups.
David Richerby
0. Adom has more trolls than Nethack.
Dave.
--
David Richerby ``I'm in my happy place. I'm in my happy place.
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ REBOOT!'' -- _User Friendly_
Klaus Schilling
> In article <90846485...@hkchan.pc.my>,
> Chan Hoong Keong <hkc...@hkchan.pc.my> wrote:
> >10. Adom is new, Nethack is old
> >9. Adom has more classes than Nethack
> >8. Adom has more skills than Nethack
> >7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
> >6. Adom has level and class specific special power, Nethack hasn't
> >5. Adom has mushroom, Nethack has mold
> >4. Adom has multiple quests, Nethack has only 1
> >3. Adom has Chaos power, Nethack has nothing
> >2. Adom has multiple ways to win, Nethack has only 1
> >1. Adom is much easier than Nethack!!!
>
> 0. Adom has more trolls than Nethack.
If you think something is missing in Nethack, go and implement it. It's
possible because Nethack is free software. Adom is proprietary, thus worthless.
Klaus Schilling
Jon Schatz
> 10. Adom is new, Nethack is old
> 9. Adom has more classes than Nethack
> 8. Adom has more skills than Nethack
> 7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
> 6. Adom has level and class specific special power, Nethack hasn't
> 5. Adom has mushroom, Nethack has mold
> 4. Adom has multiple quests, Nethack has only 1
> 3. Adom has Chaos power, Nethack has nothing
> 2. Adom has multiple ways to win, Nethack has only 1
> 1. Adom is much easier than Nethack!!!
>
0. ADOM isn't available for Macintosh because, according to the develper,
Macintosh is not a "major platform." I fart in ADOM's general direction.
David Damerell
>0. ADOM isn't available for Macintosh because, according to the develper,
>Macintosh is not a "major platform." I fart in ADOM's general direction.
This is a specific case of the general problem; Adom is closed source.
Otherwise, some competent Mac person could make it available - exactly
what has happened with NetHack on many platforms.
--
David/Kirsty Damerell. dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
CUWoCS President. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/ Hail Eris!
|___| I was wrong. I was wrong to ever doubt. I can get along without. |___|
| | | I can love my fellow man. But I'm damned if I'll love yours.[AE] | | |
Zircon
>
> 10. Adom is new, Nethack is old
> 9. Adom has more classes than Nethack
> 8. Adom has more skills than Nethack
> 7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
> 6. Adom has level and class specific special power, Nethack hasn't
> 5. Adom has mushroom, Nethack has mold
> 4. Adom has multiple quests, Nethack has only 1
> 3. Adom has Chaos power, Nethack has nothing
> 2. Adom has multiple ways to win, Nethack has only 1
> 1. Adom is much easier than Nethack!!!
>
>
> Email : hkc...@hkchan.pc.my
I'll just address all of these things at once. What makes NetHack great
is its unparalleled attention to detail. Every day I can say I found
something cool in NetHack I'd never seen before. "Your spider sense is
tingling." - a result of hallucinating with warning. Gremlins multiply
when they get wet! I thought that was hilarious the first time I saw it
happen. Flesh golems turn into stone golems when hit with a cockatrice
corpse, etc. NetHack also incorporates many fantasy ideas and culture
into it (Mjollnir, the Goblin King from The Hobbit). But the
detail...it is so complex I can't believe it. The DevTeam thought of
absolutely everything. And if anyone told me a game was better than
NetHack because it was easier, I'd just laugh. After playing NetHack
for about 6 years, I was amazed at how many different things could kill
you. I had a party when I ascended my first NetHack character, because
of all the hours I put into this game getting better at it. When you
win NetHack, you know you have accomplished something which is truly
challenging and takes a lot of dedication. I have never actually seen
ADOM but I have to say that being better than NetHack is a
near-impossible feat.
Zircon
Sascha
I love those wars! Whether it's about OS or games, there can't ever be
a winner!
> 10. Adom is new, Nethack is old
Is Adom finished finally? If I want a cool beta, I use Slashem.
> 9. Adom has more classes than Nethack
nethack has enough classes, IMO. Slashem has some more. In Adom I
never know how to combine all the possibilities.
> 8. Adom has more skills than Nethack
agreed, some of them are cool.
> 7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
which nethack version do you mean? since 3.2.0 (and NH+) there are
weapon skills.
> 6. Adom has level and class specific special power, Nethack hasn't
Sure it has. each character has special abilites and a special spell.
> 5. Adom has mushroom, Nethack has mold
what's that?
> 4. Adom has multiple quests, Nethack has only 1
agreed. But there are several special levels in slashem. One could
call them quests.
> 3. Adom has Chaos power, Nethack has nothing
and that's good this way. I hate this chaos thing since it limits the
game time of Adom seriously.
> 2. Adom has multiple ways to win, Nethack has only 1
I never won Adom, but I think it's the same fashion, go down the
levels and kill many monsters. Retrieve something and go back to the
starting point.
> 1. Adom is much easier than Nethack!!!
that depends. You could also say "english is easier than german" or
"apples taste better than bananas".
So, only two things remain that _I_ think are better in Adom, but it's
all personal taste.
Sascha
--
net...@gmx.de | the old E-Mail and URL
NETHACK 3.2.x SPOILER SITE : http://come.to/nethack | are still valid, but
Quote of Today : | please use these ones
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.
Sascha
> Not technically true. Each class has a different quest. Then you add
> the Gnomish Mines, Vlad's Tower...
> Then there's the Sokoban levels...which DOS players can now play...it's
> quite fun :B
no, they can't and that's not funny :(
Mandala
>
> Not technically true. Each class has a different quest. Then you add
> the Gnomish Mines, Vlad's Tower...
> Then there's the Sokoban levels...which DOS players can now play...it's
> quite fun :B
What the heck are the Sokoban levels???
Mandala
Raymond Martineau
Don't like Nethack? Make your own game.
Anyone who has been paying attention knows that his arguments carry no
weight. (Especially #2.)
--
Raymond Martineau
Maintainer of the Adom Bug Page: http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~bk039/index.htm
FlamingCheeseMonkey
>"apples taste better than bananas".
hm, you *could* say "english is easier than german", but you'd (imo)
false. the original post said that adom (i always pronounce it "a
dumb" for 'a dumb roguelike', but that's just me) is easier than
nethack. even though i used to play a little adumb on the side, i
can't confirm or deny which is easier. i just like nethack better.
anyway, my point is, unless it's your first language, english is most
*definitely* not easier than german (german actually makes *sense*).
not to start a war about german vs english, but i think most
german/english speakers will agree that english is just a joke of a
language.
-Phil, (perhaps) a budding linguist
and fellow nethacker
Warren Cheung
Sascha wrote:
>
> Warren Cheung wrote on Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:22:24 -0700 :
>
> > Not technically true. Each class has a different quest. Then you add
> > the Gnomish Mines, Vlad's Tower...
> > Then there's the Sokoban levels...which DOS players can now play...it's
> > quite fun :B
>
> no, they can't and that's not funny :(
Actually, as of this thursday, the binary on the webpage should handle
it all fine...So go and grab your copy today!
And yes, the next release will contain tiles for ALL the monsters (and
I'm not talking about ogre stand-ins...) <G> Yes, they're ALL done!
Ben Aveling
> not to start a war about german vs english, but i think most
> german/english speakers will agree that english is just a joke of a
> language.
No, English isn't not that bad. It's just... flexible. And big.
Which is good and bad. German is odd. Why always leave the verb till
last?
Der keeper hat die ball gedropped?
Italian, now there's a *nice* language. Almost nice enough to make we
wonder if I should have a real look at latin some time.
For the record: Native english speaker, with a little german and italian.
Regards, BenA, killed by a pairs of cockatrices. Dow!
ObHack: Large dog eat cameleon corpse and turns into ... a giant mimic. Dow!
--
"It's not my job to teach you how to read or to think. If you have a
critical failing in either of those abilities, you will find yourself in
situations where you will look foolish because of it." -Sean K. Reynolds
Oliver Richman
wrote:
> [blah blah blah]
10. Low-quality user interface
Detail: ADOM had user interface that I would describe as
"non-intuitive", meaning that commands nor command keys were
associated to what they actually did. You had to re-map the entire
keyboard in your head as to what it did. No easy k=kick, d=drop, etc.
Instead you had the entire keyboard re-laid, and most of those
commands duplicated or triplicated as an ":" command. ":" commands are
similar to the meta-commands ("#") in Nethack except that it's a
short, relevant list, and does not contain 5 ways to view your
inventory.
9. Time consuming character generation
Detail: That should be time consuming, bloated, non-original character
generation procedure. Some of it, *most notably* the automatic
background, was stolen from an AD&D character generation program
published as FREEWARE at least 10 years ago. Now they have put it into
a "non free" program, but that is another issue... the next one.
8. Useless character classes
Detail: It is possible to create a class that has the same skills and
attributes that another class has depending on your race, skill
choice, etc. therefore invalidating many of their classes as being
truly original.
7. Few references to the real world
Detail: ADOM prides itself in having all sorts of "cool" things like
"Chaos Gods" etc. Well maybe they are cool but so what, that is not
why anyone plays ADOM. Nethack has Moloch, the god of Chaos. So you
can say that Nethack has Chaos Gods. Hey wait a minute, ADOM users are
always saying how great and original CHAOS is. Sounds like a crock to
me.
I play Nethack because it has a HUGE connection to the hacker
community. The msdos.txt file that comes with NetHack for the PC is a
testimony to the blood of the hackers that was shed in the making of
nethack. And ADOM thinks CHAOS is cool. Gee. Well I guess it is kinda
cool. Heheheheh.
6. Loss of touch with internal game reality
Detail: The ADOM game seems to loose touch with it's own internal
reality and draw upon realities from other games such as those
produced by SquareSoft and the Final Fantasy series. This is very bad
since they do not credit those companies with blatant ripoffs of items
from their games, etc. for example the "punch" weapon... Hmmmm.
5. The average mentality of ADOM players is lower than that of NETHACK
Detail: NetHack users don't post trolls in rec.games.roguelike.adom,
but they love to come here. It is definately true that someone who
feels insecure has a "need" to lash out at others, but in THAT
instance it was just not acceptable.
4. ADOM has not been thoughroughly bug tested
Details: It contains crash inducing spelling mistakes.
3. Your chances of character survival are not determined mainl by
skill.
Detail: It is possible to run into traps, monsters, scrolls, wands,
exploding things, etc. or whatever and they are what I would classify
as "instant death" objects. Which means that once you come within
their general area you are going to die and there is nothing you can
do about it. For example I believe there was one object "Boots of
death" or whatever the hell it was. I put the boots on and I died.
That's just dumb.
2. My logfile contains 9.2 million entries and I needed more space to
hold all my new ascention records.
1. When it comes down to it, ADOM has some neat things in it but it is
not as playable as Nethack. That's just all there is to it. It's
different so some people will like it more, but that is probably just
because they have never given nethack a chance. Nethack is just more
. "playable".. as I said, easier to learn the interface, easier to
get to "areas" in the game, easier to do a lot of things, but
simultaneously harder. It's like in ADOM it's hard to figure something
out but easy to do once you know about it. This makes you feel like
you are part of a book not a roleplaying adventure. In Nethack you
feel free because everything is easy to figure out but even if you
knwo the answert it's still not completely solved yet. Because there
are just too many variables. So you make a plan.. or whatever.. In
ADOM you just can't do that.
So I deleted it. . poof. And I'm never going to download it again.
--opr
orichman at hotmail dot com \ GAMES: #1: UltraWhack 0.8.3 for DOS/WIN
Visit the Lair of the C++ Games at \ #2: LightCycles++ (Like the movie TRON)
www.pathcom.com/~simex/opr/index.html \
Philipp Lucas
wrote:
[10 Anti-ADOM statements snipped]
Ok, can we now skip this? Some people like ADOM, some like NH. While
everone can post their opinions about a game, these flames are, IMHO,
useless. Go to rlg-news, download some games (not only NH, Angband or
ADOM, but also Crawl and LORD are worth checking out) and build yout
own opinion.
Oh, Oliver: ADOM-[10] -> RTFM. HTH.
--
Philipp Lucas
phl...@online-club.de
JenXen2
Rogue, Angband, ADOM, a very short game of Alphaman, and I must admit "Fatal
Labyrinth" on the Genesis...), and I decided to look through this newsgroup.
What should I find but a poorly considered "Mine is good so yours is bad"
post, probably proposed merely as a troll. Too bad.
As I read through the thread (Hey, I really like ADOM), I was nearly
compelled to respond to all the negative things said about ADOM with "You're
ignorant because...", "NO! ADOM is better because...", or "My @ is bigger than
your @". Instead, I will defend ADOM the best I can without defaming "your"
game.
I _like_ ADOM... it is a very fun game, with a lot of detail, and is
available completely for free. TK is a nice guy, who wants to protect his game
until he considers it "done", while keeping an eye out for possible commercial
development. The bugs are slowly working out of it, and the detail keeps
increasing. Some claims were made about ADOM's features following remarks
about not really playing very far into the game, or not liking the interface.
I didn't like the interface to Angband at first, but it grew on me. I didn't
play very far into it, because of... well that's another troll.
And now, I will attempt to respond to the first post... please bear in mind
I haven't even played NetHack yet.
>> 10. Adom is new, Nethack is old
Age makes no difference with function-before-form games. But maturity and
wisdom are sometimes functions of age...
>> 9. Adom has more classes than Nethack
>> 8. Adom has more skills than Nethack
As long as it's fun, who cares? Rogue has _one_ class and no skills.
>> 7. Adom has interesting weapon proficiency, Nethack hasn't
>> 6. Adom has level and class specific special power, Nethack hasn't
These could turn me off of Nethack. I'll reserve judgement. I like my
min-maxing (not in real RPGs, but in roguealikes)
>> 5. Adom has mushroom, Nethack has mold
They both have swords, right?
>> 4. Adom has multiple quests, Nethack has only 1
ADOM quests _are_ pretty cool, about half require some actual thought or use of
good tactics, and provide some direction in the huge game world.
>> 3. Adom has Chaos power, Nethack has nothing
Chaos "powers" are actually curses, even if you follow the Chaos "path" of the
game. As an ADOM devotee, I still wonder if these don't pop up a little toooo
often.
>> 2. Adom has multiple ways to win, Nethack has only 1
ADOM has one way to win that I know of, one way to rule or destroy the world
that I have heard hints of, and I think there is a way to ascend to godhood.
If Nethack truly only has one way to win... well I'm trying not to troll.
>> 1. Adom is much easier than Nethack!!!
ADOM is _not_ easy IMO. One post mentioned seemingly random death at the hands
of too-tough monsters and powerful traps. This is the nature of Roguelike
games. If we all wanted to be assured of victory, we would play Ultima games.
Sorry to bore you with the long post. I was just looking around and saw
poor ol' ADOM getting bashed because of one person's thoughtless troll (top 10
lists being sooo original). Give ADOM a chance while I'm giving Nethack a
chance.
David Damerell
>Ok, can we now skip this? Some people like ADOM, some like NH. While
>everone can post their opinions about a game, these flames are, IMHO,
>useless. Go to rlg-news, download some games (not only NH, Angband or
>ADOM, but also Crawl and LORD are worth checking out) and build yout
>own opinion.
Crawl is not worth checking out - nice game, but it might as well be
closed-source. It amazes me that even the original author can work on it;
the source code is the most indescribable mess you've ever seen. It makes
the original Hack mhitu.c and eat.c and the like with their
switch (monster letter) {
case 'a':
this;
case 'b': /* fall through */
and so forth look beautiful and tidy.
[mpr could say this better, since he introduced me to Crawl.]
--
David/Kirsty Damerell. dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
CUWoCS President. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/ Hail Eris!
|___| fak...@fowler-schocken.culture.dotat.at is not my email address,|___|
| | | and email sent to it will be assumed to be spam and blocked. | | |
David Damerell
>9. Time consuming character generation
>Detail: That should be time consuming, bloated, non-original character
>generation procedure. Some of it, *most notably* the automatic
>background, was stolen from an AD&D character generation program
>published as FREEWARE at least 10 years ago. Now they have put it into
>a "non free" program, but that is another issue... the next one.
Of course, if the original program was public domain, not GPL or similar,
this is perfectly legal. Unsporting, but legal.
>Detail: The ADOM game seems to loose touch with it's own internal
>reality and draw upon realities from other games such as those
>produced by SquareSoft and the Final Fantasy series. This is very bad
>since they do not credit those companies with blatant ripoffs of items
>from their games, etc. for example the "punch" weapon... Hmmmm.
Um, do you mean the idea of hitting monsters with your fist? Or punch
daggers? Both those ideas are, ah, a little bit older than computers.
>3. Your chances of character survival are not determined mainl by
>skill.
>Detail: It is possible to run into traps, monsters, scrolls, wands,
>exploding things, etc. or whatever and they are what I would classify
>as "instant death" objects.
The gnome zaps a wand of death! --More--
[Not a problem confined to ADOM.]
Klaus Schilling
> On Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:01:24 GMT, oli...@jesus.hv (Oliver Richman)
> wrote:
>
> [10 Anti-ADOM statements snipped]
>
> Ok, can we now skip this? Some people like ADOM, some like NH. While
> everone can post their opinions about a game, these flames are, IMHO,
> useless. Go to rlg-news, download some games (not only NH, Angband or
> ADOM, but also Crawl and LORD are worth checking out) and build yout
> own opinion.
I only check those out who come with freely modifiable and redistributable
source code. No source - no deal. Adom is non-free software, unlike Nethack.
Klaus Schilling
G Masonic
(David Damerell) whispered to Solomon:
>>9. Time consuming character generation
>>Detail: That should be time consuming, bloated, non-original character
>>generation procedure. Some of it, *most notably* the automatic
>>background, was stolen from an AD&D character generation program
>>published as FREEWARE at least 10 years ago. Now they have put it into
>>a "non free" program, but that is another issue... the next one.
>
>Of course, if the original program was public domain, not GPL or similar,
>this is perfectly legal. Unsporting, but legal.
I doubt any of this is true, since TB would definitely cite any "code
theft". The guy gets awards and crap for programming in his native
land, and I doubt he's pilfering code from all over the place.
>>Detail: The ADOM game seems to loose touch with it's own internal
>>reality and draw upon realities from other games such as those
>>produced by SquareSoft and the Final Fantasy series. This is very bad
>>since they do not credit those companies with blatant ripoffs of items
>>from their games, etc. for example the "punch" weapon... Hmmmm.
>
>Um, do you mean the idea of hitting monsters with your fist? Or punch
>daggers? Both those ideas are, ah, a little bit older than computers.
I think he is talking about the artifact "Big Punch", a huge, insanely
heavy lead-filled mace. I don't know how this is from Final Fantasy.
I don't know what the hell the original poster is talking about,
actually. What IS stolen from FF?
>>3. Your chances of character survival are not determined mainl by
>>skill.
>>Detail: It is possible to run into traps, monsters, scrolls, wands,
>>exploding things, etc. or whatever and they are what I would classify
>>as "instant death" objects.
Traps ARE too dangerous. But an instant death" monster? Run away.
Use a different tactic. DUh. wands aren't instant death objects.
Monsters don't even have inventories yet. Ugh.
>The gnome zaps a wand of death! --More--
Yep.
The original poster either has a turgid imagination, has never really
played ADOM, or is a complete loon. (Killer boots, indeed.)
-----
Go to:
www.11thhourradioshow.com
or die.
johnny carroll norris
: Twas brillig, and FlamingCheeseMonkey scrobe:
: > not to start a war about german vs english, but i think most
: > german/english speakers will agree that english is just a joke of a
: > language.
:
: No, English isn't not that bad. It's just... flexible. And big.
: Which is good and bad. German is odd. Why always leave the verb till
: last?
:
: Der keeper hat die ball gedropped?
:
: Italian, now there's a *nice* language. Almost nice enough to make we
: wonder if I should have a real look at latin some time.
With Latin, the verb is (generally) the last word in the sentence. The first
and last words are supposedly the most important places in a sentence, so the
subject goes first and the predicate goes last. Personally, I hate waiting
until the end of the sentence to learn what's being done.
John, native English speaker who knows a little Bulgarian and has forgotten
nearly all the Latin he learned in high school.
--
John Norris
Center for Simulation of Advanced Rockets
jno...@uiuc.edu
http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/jnorris
ivan...@my-dejanews.com
Freemason@Solomon's.Temple (G Masonic) wrote:
>
> I doubt any of this is true, since TB would definitely cite any "code
> theft". The guy gets awards and crap for programming in his native
> land, and I doubt he's pilfering code from all over the place.
I believe it. Everyone says Thomas Biskup is a nice guy, but I've gotten in
am argument with him over closed/open source and he sent me some horrible
flames. He called me a twit, invited me to ``drop off the face of the earth''
swore at me, etc. He definitely has an attitude problem and a hyper-inflated
ego. I remember the interview with him where he said that he doesn't want to
release ADOM source because he thinks nobody in the world could improve the
game without ``ruining'' it. That's too bad -- I have some source code that I
could immediately drop into ADOM to give ADOM an X11 interface. This would be
a great boon to many people considering that ADOM has never worked in an
xterm.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Gero Kunter
> In article <362c40c7...@news.erols.com>,
> Freemason@Solomon's.Temple (G Masonic) wrote:
> >
> > I doubt any of this is true, since TB would definitely cite any "code
> > theft". The guy gets awards and crap for programming in his native
> > land, and I doubt he's pilfering code from all over the place.
>
> I believe it. Everyone says Thomas Biskup is a nice guy, but I've gotten
> in am argument with him over closed/open source and he sent me some
> horrible flames. He called me a twit, invited me to ``drop off the face of
> the earth'' swore at me, etc. He definitely has an attitude problem and a
> hyper-inflated ego. I remember the interview with him where he said that
> he doesn't want to release ADOM source because he thinks nobody in the
> world could improve the game without ``ruining'' it. That's too bad -- I
> have some source code that I could immediately drop into ADOM to give ADOM
> an X11 interface. This would be a great boon to many people considering
> that ADOM has never worked in an xterm.
I've never spoken to Thomas Biskup myself, so it is possible that he
becomes hot quickly in discussions; however, I don't know if he may have
felt provoked by your arguments, but it is not my business and I'll say
nothing about it.
But I can understand his attitude about his game. I'm working on some
kind of roguelike myself, and my intention is not to create something
everybody will love, and I don't know if I'll ever make it available to the
public: I want to create my own fantasy world, I want to create
the atmosphere I imagine. For me, it is some kind of artistic process, like
composing a musical score, writing a short story or painting a picture.
Maybe artists - and those who believe they are artists - have to have a big
ego, maybe that is it what makes an artist different from a craftsman. An
artist attempts to find means to express what is going on in his/her
imagination, and any influence from an outside person would spoil the inside
picture.
I think you should look at TB's statement under this light. You
shouldn't understand it the way that he knows everything a roguelike player
likes. He is afraid that ideas implemented by other people, no matter if
they are good ideas or bad ideas, would 'ruin' his personal world, would
make the game, his creation, different from the one he has himself fancied.
Of course, his closed source policity makes it impossible to port the
game to any platform he does not support himself, but it is _his_ decision.
If it is o.k. for him to lose all those potential *nix players, then he
should go on with his policity. After all, if somebody is willing to shares
his/her work with the rest of the world, we should appreciate it, not
complain about the way it is done.
Sorry, this posting became longer than I expected, so I better shut
up...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gero Kunter
kun...@mathematik.uni-marburg.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ivan Igor Tkatchev
Gero Kunter <kun...@mathematik.uni-marburg.de> wrote:
>Maybe artists - and those who believe they are artists - have to have a big
>ego, maybe that is it what makes an artist different from a craftsman. An
>artist attempts to find means to express what is going on in his/her
>imagination, and any influence from an outside person would spoil the inside
>picture.
You may be right. I personally think ``artist'' is a bad word. :) (Well,
not really, but still.) I just don't see how having many different visions
of ADOM's world can possibly be a bad thing. If you don't like someone's
vision, just don't play it. No-one is forcing anyone to play his or her
game. The original source code isn't suddenly ``spoiled'' because more
people have enjoyed it than the author originally intented.
> I think you should look at TB's statement under this light. You
>shouldn't understand it the way that he knows everything a roguelike player
>likes. He is afraid that ideas implemented by other people, no matter if
>they are good ideas or bad ideas, would 'ruin' his personal world, would
>make the game, his creation, different from the one he has himself fancied.
There's nothing that says that Thomas must integrate changes into official
ADOM source. Really, I don't see what he has to lose.
> Of course, his closed source policity makes it impossible to port the
>game to any platform he does not support himself, but it is _his_ decision.
>If it is o.k. for him to lose all those potential *nix players, then he
>should go on with his policity. After all, if somebody is willing to shares
>his/her work with the rest of the world, we should appreciate it, not
>complain about the way it is done.
But the point is that he's _not_ sharing. He comes off as if he's having a
giant ego trip, releasing the game not because he wants to create
something for the world to enjoy, but because he wants fame. (I don't know
if it's true or not, but that's how it seems to me, at least.)
G Masonic
(Gero Kunter) whispered to Solomon:
>ivan...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> In article <362c40c7...@news.erols.com>,
>> Freemason@Solomon's.Temple (G Masonic) wrote:
>> >
>> > I doubt any of this is true, since TB would definitely cite any "code
>> > theft". The guy gets awards and crap for programming in his native
>> > land, and I doubt he's pilfering code from all over the place.
>>
>> I believe it. Everyone says Thomas Biskup is a nice guy, but I've gotten
>> in am argument with him over closed/open source and he sent me some
>> horrible flames. He called me a twit, invited me to ``drop off the face of
>> the earth'' swore at me, etc. He definitely has an attitude problem and a
>> hyper-inflated ego. I remember the interview with him where he said that
>> he doesn't want to release ADOM source because he thinks nobody in the
>> world could improve the game without ``ruining'' it. That's too bad -- I
>> have some source code that I could immediately drop into ADOM to give ADOM
>> an X11 interface. This would be a great boon to many people considering
>> that ADOM has never worked in an xterm
He has never said that HE WILL NOT release the source. HE HAS said
that the stupid "NO, I don giove a shit what da license sez, I'm gonna
release my ADOM varianst every-e-where!" arguements he ha seen has
made him rethink his strategy. HE WILL most likely, when hitting v.
1.00, release it to at least a few folks dedicated to porting it. HE
MAY release it to all.
And just because he flamed you does not make him a code-thief.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I've never spoken to Thomas Biskup myself, so it is possible that he
>becomes hot quickly in discussions; however, I don't know if he may have
>felt provoked by your arguments, but it is not my business and I'll say
>nothing about it.
> But I can understand his attitude about his game. I'm working on some
>kind of roguelike myself, and my intention is not to create something
>everybody will love, and I don't know if I'll ever make it available to the
>public: I want to create my own fantasy world, I want to create
>the atmosphere I imagine. For me, it is some kind of artistic process, like
>composing a musical score, writing a short story or painting a picture.
>Maybe artists - and those who believe they are artists - have to have a big
>ego, maybe that is it what makes an artist different from a craftsman. An
>artist attempts to find means to express what is going on in his/her
>imagination, and any influence from an outside person would spoil the inside
>picture.
> I think you should look at TB's statement under this light. You
>shouldn't understand it the way that he knows everything a roguelike player
>likes. He is afraid that ideas implemented by other people, no matter if
>they are good ideas or bad ideas, would 'ruin' his personal world, would
>make the game, his creation, different from the one he has himself fancied.
In a file that comes with the download, he explains his position very
eloquently. You are correct that he doesn't want his vision poisoned
with variants making molochs a character class and hand grenades and
howitzers and toasters and Red Ryder Rifles and Sister Wrath and...
He doesn't want ZAngDOM, KAngDOM, CthADOM.
G Masonic
Tkatchev) whispered to Solomon:
>In article <70g445$l8g$1...@surz18.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
>Gero Kunter <kun...@mathematik.uni-marburg.de> wrote:
>
>>ego, maybe that is it what makes an artist different from a craftsman. An
>>artist attempts to find means to express what is going on in his/her
>>imagination, and any influence from an outside person would spoil the inside
>>picture.
>
>not really, but still.) I just don't see how having many different visions
>of ADOM's world can possibly be a bad thing. If you don't like someone's
>vision, just don't play it. No-one is forcing anyone to play his or her
>game. The original source code isn't suddenly ``spoiled'' because more
>people have enjoyed it than the author originally intented.
You do not understand art. If I spray paint on the Mona Lisa, should
I be rewarded for my art if some hooligan giggles at me?
>> I think you should look at TB's statement under this light. You
>>shouldn't understand it the way that he knows everything a roguelike player
>>likes. He is afraid that ideas implemented by other people, no matter if
>>they are good ideas or bad ideas, would 'ruin' his personal world, would
>>make the game, his creation, different from the one he has himself fancied.
>
>There's nothing that says that Thomas must integrate changes into official
>ADOM source. Really, I don't see what he has to lose.
It dilutes HIS game. It is HIS. He made it. He owns it. He lets
you play it. HE can do what he like with HIS game. It is not an ego
trip. It is something HE made. Should you get royalties on
lightbulbs sold because T.A. Edison invented the lightbulb?
>
>> Of course, his closed source policity makes it impossible to port the
>>game to any platform he does not support himself, but it is _his_ decision.
>>If it is o.k. for him to lose all those potential *nix players, then he
>>should go on with his policity. After all, if somebody is willing to shares
>>his/her work with the rest of the world, we should appreciate it, not
>>complain about the way it is done.
>
>But the point is that he's _not_ sharing. He comes off as if he's having a
>giant ego trip, releasing the game not because he wants to create
>something for the world to enjoy, but because he wants fame. (I don't know
>if it's true or not, but that's how it seems to me, at least.)
What does sharing mean to you? Do you hate Blizzard Software because
the don't give you sourcecode? Because they hold copyrights?
Do you understand the concept of "final cut" in movies? That a
director wants creative control over his film? That he does NOT want
producers or what-have-you who do not understand his vision mucking
around with his film?
Zircon
>
> On Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:01:24 GMT, oli...@jesus.hv (Oliver Richman)
> wrote:
>
> [10 Anti-ADOM statements snipped]
>
> Ok, can we now skip this? Some people like ADOM, some like NH. While
> everone can post their opinions about a game, these flames are, IMHO,
> useless. Go to rlg-news, download some games (not only NH, Angband or
> ADOM, but also Crawl and LORD are worth checking out) and build yout
> own opinion.
>
I agree. This is rec.games.roguelike.nethack and therefore should be a
place to discuss strategies, hints, and variants of that game. There is
surely another forum for those here who would like to compare various
games to each other.
Zircon
Ryan Pavlik
> After giving the secret handshake, tkat...@cs.purdue.edu (Ivan Igor
> Tkatchev) whispered to Solomon:
>>In article <70g445$l8g$1...@surz18.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
>>game. The original source code isn't suddenly ``spoiled'' because more
>>people have enjoyed it than the author originally intented.
> You do not understand art. If I spray paint on the Mona Lisa, should
> I be rewarded for my art if some hooligan giggles at me?
You don't understand art either if you think spray painting on the Mona Lisa
for a hooligan to laugh at would constitute 'art'. :)
<snip>
>>There's nothing that says that Thomas must integrate changes into official
>>ADOM source. Really, I don't see what he has to lose.
> It dilutes HIS game. It is HIS. He made it. He owns it. He lets
> you play it. HE can do what he like with HIS game. It is not an ego
> trip. It is something HE made. Should you get royalties on
> lightbulbs sold because T.A. Edison invented the lightbulb?
>
Straw man. He's not asking for royalties. Sure, it's his game, and he made it,
he can license it as he will, but if it isn't an Open Source license, he's
only hurting himself.
Also, don't forget there are usually not splitering versions of open source
software, either.
<more snips>
>>But the point is that he's _not_ sharing. He comes off as if he's having a
>>giant ego trip, releasing the game not because he wants to create
>>something for the world to enjoy, but because he wants fame. (I don't know
>>if it's true or not, but that's how it seems to me, at least.)
Since I don't know the situation, other than the aforementioned comment, I
can't really judge his attitude, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Let's just hope he eventually sees the profit of an Open Source license.
> What does sharing mean to you? Do you hate Blizzard Software because
> the don't give you sourcecode? Because they hold copyrights?
Hello, someone needs to take Open Software 101. Open Source Licenses are just
that: licenses. You *still* hold the copyright. Period. IIRC, software in the
public domain isn't really 'Open Source(tm)' either by a rule or so, although
I could be wrong.
I don't 'hate' blizzard software for not giving me the sources, but I don't
use their software, either. See the loss? I don't use ADOM either, no source.
Now blizzard has also done some pretty unethical things, but that's off
topic...
> Do you understand the concept of "final cut" in movies? That a
> director wants creative control over his film? That he does NOT want
> producers or what-have-you who do not understand his vision mucking
> around with his film?
And how many open source products do you know that have been 'damaged' by
outside contribution? Any? Ever? FUD FUD FUD.
In particular cases where groups disagree on 'visions' to a point where it
cannot be resolved, there has been a split, and usually resulting in two
different, yet equally useful, products. Prime examples are Emacs and XEmacs,
and gcc/egcs/pgcc. I can't think of others. There was nothing 'ruined' in any
of these cases.
The argument that so much more could be done with ADOM if it were under and
Open Source license is the issue here. X ports. Bugfixes. Implementation help,
speedier development. In the end, closed source software will fade into
oblivion, unable to compete with the faster, more robust, bug-free
alternatives. ADOM is no exception.
--
-RJP
Ivan Igor Tkatchev
G Masonic <Freemason@Solomon's.Temple> wrote:
>
I trust the previous poster more than a person who called me names.
Of course, I'm not in any position to judge Thomas. I'm sure that if he
was posting here, he'd say equally nasty things about me.
>
>In a file that comes with the download, he explains his position very
>eloquently. You are correct that he doesn't want his vision poisoned
>with variants making molochs a character class and hand grenades and
>howitzers and toasters and Red Ryder Rifles and Sister Wrath and...
``Poisoned''? The original ADOM source code would remain pristine. The
only thing that could be construed to be ``poisoned'' is the harddrive of
a person who downloaded an ADOM variant.
>
>He doesn't want ZAngDOM, KAngDOM, CthADOM.
Why not? ZAngDOM would be a great idea. Nobody is forcing you to play it,
and Thomas needn't care that it even exist. Some people would enjoy such a
beast greatly, so what's the harm?
Ivan Igor Tkatchev
G Masonic <Freemason@Solomon's.Temple> wrote:
>
>I be rewarded for my art if some hooligan giggles at me?
Does that mean you shouldn't be able to spraypaint a personal copy of the
Mona Lisa if you wanted to?
>It dilutes HIS game. It is HIS. He made it. He owns it. He lets
>you play it. HE can do what he like with HIS game. It is not an ego
>trip. It is something HE made. Should you get royalties on
>lightbulbs sold because T.A. Edison invented the lightbulb?
Royalties? If he wanted the game to be HIS he should never have released
it to the public. I'm not saying that other people should dictate what
should belong in ADOM. I'm saying that an unselfish person would release
the source code in case some kind soul wants to tinker with it. If anyone
will be modifying ADOM source code, rest assured they will do so only because
they like the game and want it improved. Who are you to judge that their
ideas are worthless?
>
>What does sharing mean to you? Do you hate Blizzard Software because
>the don't give you sourcecode? Because they hold copyrights?
Blizzard doesn't pretent to be anything but a money-grubbing commercial
entity. (Not that being a money-grubbing commercial entity is a bad
thing.)
>
>Do you understand the concept of "final cut" in movies? That a
>director wants creative control over his film? That he does NOT want
>producers or what-have-you who do not understand his vision mucking
>around with his film?
You're comparing apples and oranges. This is software, not film we're
talking about. Thomas would retain complete control over his creation if
he were to release the source. He wouldn't be able to dictate what other
people should do to their game, but that's exactly how it should be.
G Masonic
tkat...@cs.purdue.edu (Ivan Igor Tkatchev) gurgled this out before
expiring:
>>He doesn't want ZAngDOM, KAngDOM, CthADOM.
>
>Why not? ZAngDOM would be a great idea. Nobody is forcing you to play it,
>and Thomas needn't care that it even exist. Some people would enjoy such a
>beast greatly, so what's the harm?
Because he does not want them. It's his baby, he can allow people to
do only what he wants them to.
------
Coming soon to your web browser of choice:
"The Scienterrific Laboratorius of
Doktor Festus E. Technologicus"
G Masonic
expiring:
<snip>
Just read the freaking docs for the program. It makes sense.
G Masonic
expiring:
>>
>>Do you understand the concept of "final cut" in movies? That a
>>director wants creative control over his film? That he does NOT want
>>producers or what-have-you who do not understand his vision mucking
>>around with his film?
>
>You're comparing apples and oranges. This is software, not film we're
>talking about. Thomas would retain complete control over his creation if
>he were to release the source. He wouldn't be able to dictate what other
>people should do to their game, but that's exactly how it should be.
Ugh. It would STILL BE HIS GAME. Just becuase they have the source
does not make them the owners of the game itself, just of a copy of
the code. You cannot buy a copy of "Titanic", add in some scenes from
"The Little Mermaid", and release it to everyone.
Ivan Igor Tkatchev
G Masonic <Freemason@Solomon's.Temple> wrote:
>
>do only what he wants them to.
Of course he can, but it's selfish and rude.
>
G Masonic
tkat...@cs.purdue.edu (Ivan Igor Tkatchev) gurgled this out before
expiring:
Fart.
Klaus Schilling
> >
> >But the point is that he's _not_ sharing. He comes off as if he's having a
> >giant ego trip, releasing the game not because he wants to create
> >something for the world to enjoy, but because he wants fame. (I don't know
> >if it's true or not, but that's how it seems to me, at least.)
>
> the don't give you sourcecode? Because they hold copyrights?
>
Oracle, Corel etc.
Klaus Schilling
Remco Gerlich
>I agree. This is rec.games.roguelike.nethack and therefore should be a
>place to discuss strategies, hints, and variants of that game. There is
>surely another forum for those here who would like to compare various
>games to each other.
>
rec.games.roguelike.advocacy!
--
Remco Gerlich scarblac at dds dot nl
Thomas Biskup
> Why not? ZAngDOM would be a great idea. Nobody is forcing you to play it,
> and Thomas needn't care that it even exist. Some people would enjoy such a
> beast greatly, so what's the harm?
Those people would start asking me questions about the variants. I
don't want to see those questions because they waste my time. Ask Ben
Harrison about the number of questions he probably gets about variants
he doesn't know anything about. Did you notice that he's been very
silent since the flood of variants started and that development of
mainstream Angband almost has come to a complete stop?
Bet I know the reasons...
--
Thomas Biskup
ADOM maintainer >=====------------=====< ADOM 0.9.9 Gamma 10 available now!
Official ADOM webpage available at http://www.adom.de
Thomas Biskup
> release the source. He wouldn't be able to dictate what other people
> should do to their game, but that's exactly how it should be.
Please note *complete control*. Complete control is something
different than what you describe in the last sentence, especially if
other people start to distribute their versions.
Notions like yours just convince me more and more to keep the sources
closed forever.
Thomas Biskup
> Straw man. He's not asking for royalties. Sure, it's his game, and
> he made it, he can license it as he will, but if it isn't an Open
> Source license, he's only hurting himself.
You really seem to assume that I am on some ego trip. Why am I
hurting myself? I am happy about every grateful email I receive, but
I worked on ADOM for more than two years without anyone knowing about
that and I was happy. It's not as if I need to have that
satisfaction... it's just nice to have it, but not a necessity.
> Let's just hope he eventually sees the profit of an Open Source license.
Please explain that profit to me? More questions I don't want to
answer ("why did you code xyz that way...")? More emails I don't want
to see ("how can I solve puzzle foo in variant bar...")? More stupid
questions I don't want to see ("why does DOOMADOM don't have chainsaw
nuns on rocket chairs?")? Where's the profit?
Even the benefit of getting bug fixes from other folks is countered by
the amount of time required to integrate that stuff, test it and
adjust it to my needs. It just slows down development even more.
> I don't 'hate' blizzard software for not giving me the sources, but I don't
> use their software, either. See the loss? I don't use ADOM either, no source.
Where's the loss?
> In particular cases where groups disagree on 'visions' to a point where it
> cannot be resolved, there has been a split, and usually resulting in two
> different, yet equally useful, products. Prime examples are Emacs and XEmacs,
> and gcc/egcs/pgcc. I can't think of others. There was nothing 'ruined' in any
> of these cases.
And here we get back to the artistic point... while a split is useful
for tools, it's something that an artist hardly will like ("Oh, come
on, Shakespeare, that ending in Romeo and Juliet really is
bad... we'll improve it for you if you can't see the truth of our
statement!").
> The argument that so much more could be done with ADOM if it were
> under and Open Source license is the issue here. X
> ports. Bugfixes. Implementation help, speedier development.
Team coordination. Code integration. Bugfixes for stuff I didn't
write and thus probably don't understand as well. Parallel devlopment
influencing shared sources with all the major problems this involves.
There is at least one disadvantage for each advantage you cite. And I
don't care about an X port BTW.
> In the end, closed source software will fade into oblivion, unable
> to compete with the faster, more robust, bug-free alternatives. ADOM
> is no exception.
Future will show whether you are right or not. I can see the problems
of the committee approach. Lots of time gets wasted trying to get
many folks and even more opinions coordinated.
Thomas Biskup
> ADOM source. Really, I don't see what he has to lose.
The last bits of spare time that remain to keep contact with ADOM
fans. On normal days I get about 10 ADOM emails. One some days
that's 20 to 30. I have an eight-ten hour job. I have a girlfriend.
I have a life. I try to maintain ADOM nonetheless.
Now imagine that there would be as many ADOM variants as there are
Angband variants. There is a surprising number of folks out there
unable to discover the bug report address for ADOM, although it's
positioned pretty prominently on the main screen (and the error
messages... and the web site... and the manual... and...).
According to my experience this means, that the amount of email I
receive might double or triple. That effectively means, that I'd have
to stop reading emails or posting to newsgroups.
Suddenly a fun passtime is hard work. If I am paid for it, I don't
mind hard work, but if I'm doing something in my spare time (as a
hobby), I'm doing it according to my rules. If you don't like my
rules, you can do something else, like play Nethack or Angband or
Crawl or whatever. I honestly don't care and neither does my ego.
> But the point is that he's _not_ sharing. He comes off as if he's having a
> giant ego trip, releasing the game not because he wants to create
> something for the world to enjoy, but because he wants fame. (I don't know
> if it's true or not, but that's how it seems to me, at least.)
Oh no, I'm not sharing. I didn't share anything with the 50000 folks
that downloaded ADOM from download.com, or the 5000-10000 that
download a new version from the official FTP site. No, I'm keeping
everything for myself. Get serious, man.
And yes, getting some recognition (like a couple of hundred postcards
from folks that are willing to show gratefulness) *is* a very nice
thing and I like that. That's normal.
If suddenly everyone stopped playing ADOM, I still wouldn't care,
because it started as a hobby for myself and it might as well end like
that. It has been a nice time so far, but if it's over some day, I'll
do something else. Not much of an ego trip.
Thomas Biskup
> (David Damerell) whispered to Solomon:
>>>9. Time consuming character generation
>>>Detail: That should be time consuming, bloated, non-original character
>>>generation procedure. Some of it, *most notably* the automatic
>>>background, was stolen from an AD&D character generation program
>>>published as FREEWARE at least 10 years ago. Now they have put it into
>>>a "non free" program, but that is another issue... the next one.
>>Of course, if the original program was public domain, not GPL or similar,
>>this is perfectly legal. Unsporting, but legal.
> theft". The guy gets awards and crap for programming in his native
> land, and I doubt he's pilfering code from all over the place.
Actually I might really get offended by this idiot babbling about
"stealing" something. Random background is hardly an original idea.
The inspiration of the ADOM version of random background BTW is
remotely inspired by Angband. Long before I ever even got my hands on
a workable version of Angband (probably around ADOM 0.8.4 or so) I saw
a screen shot with that tiny bit of background Angband generates and
thought "Hey, that's nice. Maybe I should expand on that idea".
Thomas Biskup
> In article <362c40c7...@news.erols.com>,
> Freemason@Solomon's.Temple (G Masonic) wrote:
>> theft". The guy gets awards and crap for programming in his native
>> land, and I doubt he's pilfering code from all over the place.
> am argument with him over closed/open source and he sent me some horrible
> flames. He called me a twit, invited me to ``drop off the face of the earth''
> swore at me, etc. He definitely has an attitude problem and a hyper-inflated
> release ADOM source because he thinks nobody in the world could improve the
> could immediately drop into ADOM to give ADOM an X11 interface. This would be
> a great boon to many people considering that ADOM has never worked in an
Yes, I remember this twit. If anyone is interested in the true story,
I have kept all the emails. This twit started with some pretty bad
insults (very personal insults) and some outrageous and looney
statements. In fact this happened on the Angband newsgroup and it
ended with him being flamed by most of the regulars of that group, if
I remember correctly. This being is suffering from some significant
mental problem...
About the interview... I'd like to see that quoted. Never ever (as
far as I can remember) did I say that nobody would be able to improve
ADOM without ruining it. What I did say is that I didn't want to see
any ruined versions, which (from my point of view) are as likely to
pop up as great versions. I don't want to see any ADOM variants with
blasters, holy hand grenades, Amberites, Duffy Duck or whatever.
Another important reason for disliking the thought of variants is,
that my email level would rise to even more unwieldy heights. It's
more than difficult to answer all the emails I get these days and I
really don't want to be bothered with endless questions about variants
I don't care about. This probably is better to understand after being
exposed to many many email questions for several years that could have
been avoided, if the author had cared to look even once into the
manual.
Thomas Biskup
>>Detail: The ADOM game seems to loose touch with it's own internal
>>reality and draw upon realities from other games such as those
>>produced by SquareSoft and the Final Fantasy series. This is very bad
>>since they do not credit those companies with blatant ripoffs of items
>>from their games, etc. for example the "punch" weapon... Hmmmm.
I never have played any game from the Final Fantasy series (I probably
would be very hard-pressed to even recognize a game of that series if
you'd show me a screen shot) and I couldn't name any title by
SquareSoft (what *have* they done?).
Anyways I doubt that their games contain anything that hasn't been
done a billion times before -- and be it just in pen & paper
roleplaying games, which is the place from which I get a lot of ADOM
inspiration.
Ulrich M. Schwarz
three (3) intelligent statements:
1. A chaqu'un son gout. Try them out. If you like them, fine. If not, bad luck.
2. Let's move to another, more sensible topic and stop flaming each other
3. T.B. is free to do with his code whatever he wants to. Some comments here by
some persons...no, I won't join in right now.
An interesting observation is, however, that noone bothered to expand this
thread to rgr.adom. I am actually considering digging out TBs address out of the
ADOM manual (yes, I do have ADOM on my HD, flame me all you like, I don't give a
rat's ass about your opinion - it's yours, I've got mine. Period.) and send a
copy of the whole thread. Haven't your parents taught you that you don't talk
about others in their absence?
Excuse me while I go cooling down...
(I'm still waiting for anybody to read 2.)
-----
Ulrich M. Schwarz - uschwarz <at> nwn <dot> de
LAdams6664
>about others in their absence
>Ulrich M. Schwarz - uschwarz <at> nwn <dot> de
And didn't the original guy who posted his "my game is better than your game"
post ever hear of the saying that people who live in glass houses should not be
throwing stones?
Jeffrey Bay
Ah yes. However, he was playing ADOM, and in ADOM, it is quite feasible to
win the game only by throwing stones. Somebody put up a victory post as
proof, and called for TB to lower the efficacy of throwing rocks... Interesting
bit of game balance lore.
--
***** Jeff Bay ***** *------------->> jb...@rsn.hp.com <<--------------*
"Why are we here? | @}->-- a rose by any other name, |
because we're here." | would still not compare to her. |
-- Rush: Roll the Bones *------------->> jb...@rsn.hp.com <<--------------*
G Masonic
>In article <19981021142421...@ng72.aol.com>,
>LAdams6664 <ladam...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Haven't your parents taught you that you don't talk
>>>about others in their absence
>>>-----
>>>Ulrich M. Schwarz - uschwarz <at> nwn <dot> de
>>
>>And didn't the original guy who posted his "my game is better than your game"
>>post ever hear of the saying that people who live in glass houses should not be
>>throwing stones?
>>
>
>Ah yes. However, he was playing ADOM, and in ADOM, it is quite feasible to
>win the game only by throwing stones. Somebody put up a victory post as
>proof, and called for TB to lower the efficacy of throwing rocks... Interesting
>bit of game balance lore.
*cough*that'swhyitisstillintestingandnotversion1.0andthesourceisnotreleased*cough*
------
Ask Doktor Technologicus at:
http://www.erols.com/uroboros
(Not to be confused with "Ask Doctor Science" by
copyright lawyers)
Ivan Igor Tkatchev
Thomas Biskup <r...@saranxis.ruhr.de> wrote:
>
>According to my experience this means, that the amount of email I
>receive might double or triple. That effectively means, that I'd have
>to stop reading emails or posting to newsgroups.
Ask Ben Harrison if he gets flooded with emails about variants.
>Suddenly a fun passtime is hard work. If I am paid for it, I don't
>mind hard work, but if I'm doing something in my spare time (as a
>hobby), I'm doing it according to my rules.
I don't want a roguelike written by a person who needs monetary
compensation to continue with his ``hobby''.
>If you don't like my
>rules, you can do something else, like play Nethack or Angband or
>Crawl or whatever. I honestly don't care and neither does my ego.
Neither do I. I don't need ADOM and ADOM doesn't need me. It's too bad
you're alienating so many people, though. It's just not worth it.
>Oh no, I'm not sharing. I didn't share anything with the 50000 folks
>that downloaded ADOM from download.com, or the 5000-10000 that
>download a new version from the official FTP site. No, I'm keeping
>everything for myself. Get serious, man.
Ego trip. I don't care if a billion people downloaded ADOM. I don't see
how it matters at all. If I were you I'd concentrate on making a better
game instead of counting how many people download it.
>If suddenly everyone stopped playing ADOM, I still wouldn't care,
>because it started as a hobby for myself and it might as well end like
>that.
I don't believe this one bit. Why are you selling ``ADOM Deluxe'' if it's
just a hobby?
Thomas Biskup
> In article <19981021142421...@ng72.aol.com>,
> LAdams6664 <ladam...@aol.com> wrote:
>>And didn't the original guy who posted his "my game is better than your game"
>>post ever hear of the saying that people who live in glass houses should not be
>>throwing stones?
> Ah yes. However, he was playing ADOM, and in ADOM, it is quite
> feasible to win the game only by throwing stones. Somebody put up a
> victory post as proof, and called for TB to lower the efficacy of
> throwing rocks... Interesting bit of game balance lore.
Actually that was done by one of the (IMHO) best ADOM players around.
Barry Kearns (who did it) seems to have a knack for beating the game
against all odds. Try for yourself and you'll see.
Drake8
Bicker Bicker Bicker... (Paraphrasing)
Drake sez-
Not only is this a pointless argument it has nothing to do with NetHack at
all. I know almost nothing about software and even less about ADOM but this
whole thing seems circular and pointless. TB will do what he wants and the
DevTeam will do what they want and everybody's happy. I'll give ADOM a whirl
when the Mac port comes out and not before.
Let's let this die, NOW!
-Drake (killed by Neiman and Marcus arguing.)
David Damerell
>Notions like yours just convince me more and more to keep the sources
>closed forever.
So that Adom will never be ported to (and work properly on) anything but
Windows; and so as to make it impossible for players who are programmers
to fix bugs. Thanks, but I think I'll stick with NetHack.
--
David/Kirsty Damerell. dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/ w.sp.lic.#pi<largestprime>.2106
|___| NetHack players of the world unite! You have nothing |___|
| | | to lose but your blessed rustproof +2 iron chains! | | |
Thomas Biskup
> Thomas Biskup <r...@saranxis.ruhr.de> wrote:
>>Suddenly a fun passtime is hard work. If I am paid for it, I don't
>>mind hard work, but if I'm doing something in my spare time (as a
>>hobby), I'm doing it according to my rules.
> I don't want a roguelike written by a person who needs monetary
> compensation to continue with his ``hobby''.
As I said before: if you want me to *work* you'll have to pay for it.
If you want me to enjoy my hobby, you'll have to live with the way by
which *I* prefer to enjoy my hobby. It#s that simple: if you want
something, ask nicely. If you still don't get it, go away.
> Neither do I. I don't need ADOM and ADOM doesn't need me. It's too bad
> you're alienating so many people, though. It's just not worth it.
Yeah, I see you and probably another two or three annoyed people.
Very impressive compared to the number of people happy with ADOM.
>>Oh no, I'm not sharing. I didn't share anything with the 50000 folks
>>that downloaded ADOM from download.com, or the 5000-10000 that
>>download a new version from the official FTP site. No, I'm keeping
>>everything for myself. Get serious, man.
> Ego trip. I don't care if a billion people downloaded ADOM.
The statement simply meant to stress that ADOM is *shared* with a lot
of people. It#s not as if nobody would be able to get it.
> I don't see how it matters at all. If I were you I'd concentrate on
> making a better game instead of counting how many people download
> it.
If you were me, you might try to write a game that better suits your
needs. That's how ADOM got started. I was unhappy with Angband and
Nethack. Instead of harrassing the authors about it, I started to
write my own thing.
If you want to have a free GPL'ed version of ADOM: write it. Nobody
prevents you from doing so. You'll have to use a different name but
that shouldn't pose a problem.
>>If suddenly everyone stopped playing ADOM, I still wouldn't care,
>>because it started as a hobby for myself and it might as well end like
>>that.
> I don't believe this one bit. Why are you selling ``ADOM Deluxe'' if it's
> just a hobby?
ADOM Deluxe is something different than ADOM. ADOM Deluxe contains
stuff that is work for me to include. Many folks asked for things I
personally never would have wanted to see in the game. Thus here the
hobby ends and the work begins. Pay for it or forget about it. Again
I don't care.
Since this discussion by now is pretty irrelevant to Nethack, you'll
either have to take this to email or follow me to
rec.games.roguelike.adom. Otherwise you will be ignored.
Thomas Biskup
> Thomas Biskup <r...@saranxis.ruhr.de> wrote:
>>Notions like yours just convince me more and more to keep the sources
>>closed forever.
> So that Adom will never be ported to (and work properly on) anything but
> Windows;
The decision is not yet made. And I'm still considering to distribute
the sources to a few selected persons willing to port it to some other
system. ADOM BTW runs by far not only under Windows -- try to get the
facts right. It runs under Linux and under the Amiga OS and you also
can play it under DOS and OS/2. Saying that it never will run under
anything but Windows is brain-dead bullshit.
> and so as to make it impossible for players who are programmers
> to fix bugs.
Yes. There are so many people who event aren't able to write a bugfix
report that is worth reading (despite a ton of documentation telling
you what to include). I'm not sure that the majority of 'bug fixes'
would be any better.
>Thanks, but I think I'll stick with NetHack.
Yes, please do so.
Julian Bell
> what's that?
Yummy slime molds! Didn't slime molds start off in Moria?
Actually I think the most annoying thing about ADOM is how easy equipment
can get damaged or destroyed.
Or you can be disarmed of your weapon by pussy monsters, but you can't
disarm back.
I know quite a few people in the world - but I don't know anyone that has
ever been hit by a falling door. In fact, I would say that if you trapped
my door one morning I could probably jump back before it fell back on top
of me. I mean are we playing adventurers or wheelchair bound cripples?
And then when you do get hit it often destorys objects which are much
harder than a wooden door, like metals shields, weapons etc.
NetHack for my vote,
Julian