>95% of the game is a 1:1 ripoff (read: not "inspired by") of OublietteHow exactly are you supposed to cope with the fact that such an influential game was actually made by frauds?
>>12567980>B-But actually Pac-whatever was the first scrolling platformerYeah, no one cares retard
>>12567980>Sometime around 1977, Robert J. Woodhead (who was non-affectionately known on PLATO as "Balsabrain") through means unknown to the dnd authors, obtained a copy of the source code to the current version of dnd (probably 6.0 or 7.0). He "created" "his" own game from it, in a file called "sorcery." It had essentially all the same features of dnd except the messages, monsters, and magic items had different names and pictures (although identical functions). Apparently the illicit copy hadn't included the charset. The elven boots were socks, among other alterations.>When the dnd authors were informed of the existence of Woodhead's copy, and took a look at it (including looking at the source code in a monitor mode with a concerned sysop), the copy was promptly deleted, and Balsabrain learned that if he wanted to plagiarize PLATO games, he would have to do it OFF of PLATO. He put that lesson to use by plagiarizing Oubliette when he "created" "his" game of Wizardry and began to market it.
>>12567991Pac-man wasn't even a platformer lol, way to make yourself look like a fool
>>12567996
>>12568004Lol :)
>>12567980>Anon is shocked to learn the Wild West of vidya wasn't entirely ethical or cromulent
>>12568012Yeah but it's supposed to be an influential title in video games canon, that's what makes it 10x worse
>>12568020The creators of proper rpgs played wizardry not oubliette
>>12568028>played wizardry...which is a clone of a different game.
>>12568034But who cares those famous developers said they were inspired by wizardry and ultima not the first ever computer rpg oubliette or whatever
Literally all RPGs descend from DND anyway. DND defined almost every aspect of RPGs, regardless of it being EXP, classes, morality, loot, bosses, money, exploration, etc.
But is oubliette better?
>>12568065No, D&D/RPGs come from wargaming which comes from chess which comes from the original versions of chess. We're not even talking about that though, there's a difference between inspirations which you could say of D&D and its influences, but not here where it's more akin to a full copy. Like, how hard would it have been to not have the literal exact same types of monsters for instance
>>12568034And?
>>12568065And DND descends from Lord of the Rings, which descends from Beowulf, which descends from who gives a shit
>>12568113Keep buying those remakes
>>12568123I don't?
>>12568075This is the question I'm actually curious about. Can we play Oubliette right now, and how does it compare to Wizardry? I've personally never minded clone games if the clone is also good. It's a "oh shit, two cakes!" situation.
>>12568127You can but it's a convoluted process and it's not better than Wizardry. You're comparing hobbyist freeware to a polished commercial product that plagiarized it
>>12568137Fair enough. I guess I'll adjust the question a bit; is it still fun on its own? Would it be worth hopping through hoops to play it?
>>12568140It depends on what you can stomach. If you are able to play the original 1981 release of Wizardry (don't think many today can which kind of makes the is it more fun whataboutism redundant) then I think you'd be fine. It has some updated versions as well but I never looked into them. All in all I wouldn't say it's a game you'd recommend to anyone, it was just about the fact that an incredible amount of stuff was lifted from it for Wizardry
>>12568140Oubliette is a multiplayer game where each player has his own character and forms parties with other players' characters. You can't just jump into it on your own like that.
Play Mordor 1.1 you scrubs. It's another PLATO clone but of Avatar and not Oubliette.
>>12567996of course it is. did you think it was a top down maze? hell no. look at the sprites. they are in profile. theres just no jumping because ghosts arent affected by gravity and neither is pacman thanks to his diet rich in ghosts.
>itt we pretend like there was ever such a thing as "original."nothing in this world comes from the ether, kiddos. literally every single thing is built on what came before.
>>12568094Doesn't war gaming come from generals and high ranking military using it for training? And as such, it would be as realistic and less game-y as possible, unlike chess and its made up arbitrary rules. So, I don't see the connection.
>>12567980Take something and make it actually work for singleplayer.FRAUDSS!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>12567980>95% of the game is a 1:1 ripoff (read: not "inspired by") of OublietteOubliette was based on moria and ran in a Plato mainframe with other human players, and was just an unlicensed D&D computer sim like everything else from this era.Unlike wizardry it had no story or fixed opponents, nor a real quest. It could not be completed as it was really just a "game engine" with no finished game implemented. Wizardry borrowed some mechanics but most of what it borrowed were thibgs borrowed from early D&D. An Rpgadicts article lists some things wizardry "stole":>The system of rolling attributes first, then determining the character class>Raising in temples having a chance to fail, based on the character's constitutionThat was all early rules, D&D in the 70s had some terrible mechanics that were later abandoned.>classes like ninja and samurai were not in d&D in the 70s, yet wizardry stole them from this gamrThey did exist as zine suplemental rules and classes, dragon magazine was extremely popular and influential amonng the early player base. Their ninja and samurai classes from 1976/77 were popular additions and eventually got published in "oriental adventures" in 1985 by TSR.Unlicensed D&D games made up the bulk of the 80s CRPG and WRPG, with final fantasy being one of the most word for word ripoffs of 1st edtion D&D. FF1 is a more complete D&D game than many of the actual licensed games.
>>12569567NTA but I misread cunning as cumming and did a double take
>>12569567You act as if translating D&D to a brand new medium like video games was just obvious and everyone would have done it the same way. Not so, as evidenced by the fact that the pre-Oubliette titles each worked differently from each other because they were all shooting in the dark. This is a contrast from lifting heavily from one of these already pre-existing attempts. Going back to the monster classes example, D&D had a few dozen but it just so happens that the few selected to be featured in one game is wholesale copied instead of trying to come up with a new configuration consulting the source material.FF1 is D&D but it went down its own path with it, a real company who wanted to make an RPG from scratch, nobody can really accuse it of much there compared to Wizardry. To be fair, the fact that it was a company versus uni kids copying what they saw and publishing it put it at a disadvantage for the labor required to create something more novel but still, it is history that chose to put them on a pedestal in the end.I also think the fact that Ultima was a worse game is for the same reasons. It simply wasn't using someone else's iterations on what it was setting out to do. Much harder to do that and make it work well, obviously.
>>12569772>You act as if translating D&D to a brand new medium like video games was just obvious and everyone would have done it the same wayIt very quickly settled into two main types though: a top down dungeon exploration genre (Pedit5, DND, Rogue, etc) and the first person dungeon crawls (moria, Obliette, Akalabeth,wizardry), or a hybrid of the two where ovland was from abive and in dungeon went to first person.
>>12569823A perfext example of this "two types of D&D game" was the intellivion games.One was a top down adventure and one was a first person dungeon crawl. They covered both main genres of RPG.
>>12567980By not really giving a fuck I guess.
>>12569823There is more to a game than what kind of perspective it uses, especially in RPGs where it's the systems and the numbers that make or break it. Which again, I don't think was completely obvious on how it should be done in video game format.
>>12569890>where it's the systems and the numbers that make or break itD&D by its very nature provides the systems and numbers. The classes, spells, races (except for the rare bonus classes based on the devlopers niche favorite fantasy author).Going forward from this era, any D&D player could pick up wizardry, bards tale, might and magic and it would be smooth sailing, let alone things like eye of the beholder. Some of these gsmes fucked around with non-value added mechanics like food or aging charatcers, or mandatory guild visits to level up, but you coukd jump from one to the next effortlessly as they all had the same D&D foundation. Yoy could send someone with a PSP back in time to 1982 and hand then "class of heroes" and they would completly understand how to play it intuitively. Ultima was the odd man out, they went in their own direction and always felt way more alien and non-inuitive because of it.
>>12569926In the same way that FF and Wizardry differ in how they feel as games taking after D&D, there was at least that much room for interpretation there. Even to this day there are people who love JRPGs but cannot stand blobbers
>>12569942From 1977 (Oubliette) to 1981 (Wizardry)? There was very little chance to evolve much here, if your goal was to stick to the TSR derived ruleset. >move from university server to a home computer>add a story and boss fights/treasure room guardians>the game can be completed nowYou couldnt jump right to a SSI goldbox adventure, or even final fantasy. Your graphics were simple lines to paint a dungeon one way or another, and basic monster visuals. Wizardry was about the best they could do on a home PC for 1981. By the time final fantasy landed they could fit a sizable portion of monster manual 1 into a single game cart. Same for the later SSI titles.
>>12569501I want to go back to that era. This looks soulful.
>>12569567>It could not be completed as it was really just a "game engine" with no finished game implemented.Makes a lot of sense considering the environment these were played in, these games were made for people to dick around with together in computer labs. Having an end goal of sorts would work against that aspect. These were like the original MMORPGs.
>>12570057Early MUD (multi user dungeon), the precursor to MMORPG.
https://crpgbook.wordpress.com/articles/the-plato-rpgs-the-first-computer-role-playing-games/A good list of the early plato games
Why do rpg posters have to constantly poison the well of every board they are in
>>12567993If this is true, it is one of the funniest game dev stories I have ever heard, and he should still be applauded for taking these games from obscurity to the international market place. So many JRPGs were inspired by wizardry...
>>12570018>From 1977 (Oubliette) to 1981 (Wizardry)? No, from D&D adapted to video games in general, which was the original argument re: ripoffs saying that it doesn't matter because the source material was D&D when it could have been interpreted in many different ways. I believe it's a copout to say that they couldn't make FF either, the Apple II was more than capable >>12569501No, it's more like we don't pretend that inspired by and ripped off are the same thing
>>12569506The original wargame was inspired by chess
>>12570106>we don't pretend that inspired by and ripped off are the same thingdo you want to know what the actual difference is?the things you're holding in higher regard ripped off a lot of different things, so that you could not point to any particular one. the things you're treating with contempt copied fewer things, so it's easier for you to point your finger and say "this is just X."but everything "rips off" everything, anon. there is no such thing as new or original, and there never was. we've always just taken pieces of what's already here, stuck them together, and called it new and original.
>>12569501>nothing is new and original because everything is made up of matterkys pseud
>>12570205Retard thats not what he said
>>12570224that's where that argument ultimately ends up, i just fast forwarded past the annoying debatelording part
>>12570187When you have inspirations and the end result is something that resembles itself more than the other things, that's called being inspired by something. When you have inspirations and the end result is a direct reskinned version of them, that's called a rip off. Knowing the difference, lives saved, etc.
wizardry dev was straight up just the chinese /indian apple store clone game thief of his dayhttps://mattbarton.net/?p=990
>>12570407the only difference is the amount of things being ripped off.easier to assemble multiple pieces into something less immediately identifiable.it all came from somewhere. like i said, absolutely nothing in this world just springs from the ether.
>this threadZoomer watched a Youtube, the thread.
>>12570416nigga knows he was outplayed, that's why he's being so evasive and catty.
>>12570509Such bad faith strawmanning, it was never said that something comes from the ether, only that the way inspiration is applied to a work differs vastly. It's crazy how so many people jump to the defense of totally corrupt scammers
>>12570518There's literally no video essay covering this topic but you are free to make one if you want to cut the IQ of this discourse in half
>>12570641what's crazy is how quickly you've decided to label SirTech "totally corrupt scammers."as if Jim hadn't recycled large chunks of Moria, himself. is he also a totally corrupt scammer?>it was never said that something comes from the etherglad you agree with me.
>>12570649Yeah, I agree with you on that point, but that's not what is being discussed. Moria was much less similar to Oubliette than Wizardry was to it and couldn't be called a copy for that reason. And yes profiting off plagiarism tends to make you look like a scumbag
>>12570720can you name a feature or mechanic from Oubliette that wasn't taken from Dungeons and Dragons?it would be one thing if Wizardry used the same exact algorithms to calculate damage/dodge, or if it used the same exact math to determine various outcomes. hard to deny that Oubliette was definitely looked at, but even when the creator himself was pressed for details on the similarities, his answers were things like>the names of spells!gee, wow.>3D perspective!Moria beat you to that.he then says he didn't bother looking into it any further. lmaothen you've got the classes like samurai and ninja. Oriental Adventures didn't come along until '85, but i'm pretty sure i could find evidence of homebrew samurais and ninjas in Dragon or White Dwarf.i've just now read the crpg article, and the things it tries to give Oubliette credit for are a little ridiculous. >castle on top, dungeon below.>specialty shops>traps>inns>reviving charactersas all of those things could be found in D&D.Wizardry is different enough from Oubliette as it features hand-crafted encounters, a story, an ending, a full game instead of just a framework.tell me, anon, do you also consider CAPCOM to be totally corrupt scamming scumbags because of the Alone in the Dark / Resident Evil situation?
