An Idea...

[havoc]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

....If not a stupid one.

Now, I bet you've heard this millions of times, but, wouldn't be nice
if Nethack had a more..."attractive" frontend (Meaning Graphics)?
Don't get me wrong here, I enjoy playing Nethack in the "oldie" IBM
Graphics (But the ASCII graphics are just too much), but, in order to
make Nethack more...attractive towards newcomers, and standard "Diablo"
gamers, somebody should try improving on the Graphics area.

My suggestion is, either use EXULT or PENTAGRAM (Ultima 7 and Ultima 8,
respectively) engines (Found at http://exult.sourceforge.net/ and
http://pentagram.sourceforge.net/ ), although Pentagram is not mature
enough, people could get involved and help a bit...Or mabye someone
should try and continue the work done with Falcon's Eye.Better models
come to mind, Nethack 3.4.3 comes to mind, more sounds come to
mind...There is much to be done.

Another step foward (Or mabye backwards) would be Nethack as a text
adventure...A bit crazy, I know, and it would stray from the "Nethack
Philosophy", but I guess it's good enough of an idea...

Anyone interested in *really* good "Text Adventure" should play Radical
Dreamers (Found here http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=4893).I
COMPLETELY recomend it...Although Nethack as a Text Adventure would be
REALLY HARD (Especially if made something like Radical Dreamers), I
believe it's a nice perspective in Roguelike games, if not somewhat
fresh...

 

[havoc]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Aaaaah, the eternal question...

Yes, I do...But it refuses to play on my M$ box...Plus, I dont think
it's what I'm really looking for...Infinity Engine for Nethack would be
though : P

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Havoc wrote:

> ...If not a stupid one.
>
> Now, I bet you've heard this millions of times, but, wouldn't be nice
> if Nethack had a more..."attractive" frontend (Meaning Graphics)?

No, it wouldn't. If it had a graphical front end that couldn't be
bypassed, I'd go play something else. The ASCII interface is part of the
attraction of NetHack for me.

Raisse, killed by an Olog-hai

--
irina@valdyas.org LegoHack: http://www.valdyas.org/irina/nethack/
Status of Raisse (piously neutral): Level 8 HP 63(67) AC -3, fast.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Havoc wrote:
> Now, I bet you've heard this millions of times, but, wouldn't be nice
> if Nethack had a more..."attractive" frontend (Meaning Graphics)?

Do you know Noegnud?

--
If geiger counter does not click,
the coffee, she is just not thick

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On 27 Mar 2005 05:33:14 -0800, "Havoc" <B_Lizzard@hotmail.com> drained
his beer, leaned back in the rec.games.roguelike.nethack beanbag and
drunkenly proclaimed the following

>Now, I bet you've heard this millions of times, but, wouldn't be nice
>if Nethack had a more..."attractive" frontend (Meaning Graphics)?

No.

One of the reasons I like Nethack is it's nostaligic charm.
--

Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Havoc wrote:
> Aaaaah, the eternal question...
>
> Yes, I do...But it refuses to play on my M$ box...Plus, I dont think
> it's what I'm really looking for...Infinity Engine for Nethack would be
> though : P
>

You have to install noeGNUd data (version 0.8.0) as well as noeGNUd
nethack/slashem/littlehack. That's probably your problem.

--
____ (__)
/ \ (oo) -Shadow
|Moo. > \/
\____/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:

>On 27 Mar 2005 05:33:14 -0800, "Havoc" <B_Lizzard@hotmail.com> drained
>>Now, I bet you've heard this millions of times, but, wouldn't be nice
>>if Nethack had a more..."attractive" frontend (Meaning Graphics)?
>
>No.
>
>One of the reasons I like Nethack is it's nostaligic charm.

An additional interface would not entail abandoning the existing
interfaces.

--
Philipp Lucas
phlucas@online-club.de

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

"Havoc" <B_Lizzard@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111930394.264951.146640@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> ...If not a stupid one.
>
> Now, I bet you've heard this millions of times, but, wouldn't be nice
> if Nethack had a more..."attractive" frontend (Meaning Graphics)?

Have you ever played the original lemmings? 100 "lemmings", each featuring
less pixels than a character in nethack and absolutely brilliant. Later
lemmings had to be so big ,to get all the extra graphic features in , that
you only get a few and it is a completely different (and inferior) game.
Similarly worms went downhill with "better" graphics and both of these games
these were supposed to be graphical from the start.
I am currently playing with the 32x32 tiles but even at this size I find
that not getting the whole level on my 1024x768 is a bit of a pain but an
acceptable compromise since I found the small tiles gave me less info than
characters and insufficient pixels to be graphically interesting.