🚀 go-pugleaf

dwe...@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Dennis E. Weldy) writes:
>j-h...@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (James Hogan) writes:
>>"Justin Circelli (CS)" <circ...@eng.usf.edu> writes:
>>>I've read a few messages in the group about virtual reality games and 
>>>have one comment to make.  Everyone thinks DOOM is great and was the 
>>>first of its kind, but anyone with any real taste knows that  Ultima 
>>>Underworld was the original virtual reality game.  Even though its about 
>>>two years older you can still interact with it better than you can with 
>>>DOOM.  Lets put it this way Underworld makes doom look like shit. So quit 
>>>talking about it.

>>Each games has its pros and cons.  Doom is an action game, UW is an RPG; 
>>it's like (pardon the cliche) comparing apples and oranges...  the fact
>>that they both happen to have a 3-D first-person engine is irrelevant. 

>	I think it is most relavent, considering that some of us like
>and play both genera. To my mind the interface to the 3-D, first person
>perspective _is_ the issue, not the action/rpg catigorization. In this
>respect, if I were to have the Looking Glass (Underworld) interface used
>in Doom, Dooom would be a better game for it, which is also the underlying
>point of the original poster.

	Not entirely; the original poster also insinuated that Doom was the
1st 3-d action "virtual reality" game.  Which is wrong anyway.  Doom never
did make me dizzy, no matter how many times I spun around or ran facing a
brick wall.  Wolfenstein 3d did.  So if one has to use the term "virtual
reality" loosely, then the title of "father" would belong to Wolf.
	I also agree with you on the Underworld interface making Doom a much
better game; it would eliminate the boredom of shooting everything that moves.
:-)

					- Falcon