Exult and the Ultima series

[[link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exult Exult]] (also, the [[link:/groups/info/exult exult group]]) seems to be used as an excuse to create entries for games in other platforms, which I think is ridiculous. No other emulator is used as an excuse to create entries of some other games to other platforms either, so... I propose all games created on newer platforms simply because they're emulated through Exult to be deleted. Re-makes, if there are any are exempt from this(?), but should be clearly stated as such. I'm not even sure of that, since then you're only speaking of game _data_, and not a game by itself.

But Exult is not an emulator, Its a game engine. It is the same as the many Doom and Quake engines created to run the data of these game on other platforms. Who says "Doom emulator" or "Quake emulator"?, just because it is running on a different platform than the original. When Exult runs on Linux, Windows, or OSX, it is not 'emulating DOS'. There's no CPU level code used from the DOS version. The there's no emulation of 'DOS memory' or the 'voodoo memory manager' which the original Ultima VII was infamous for. The engine doesn't send information to an emulated 'DOS mouse driver'. Its running an engine native to the platform that just happens to use data from the DOS version. There's no DOS code in exult, its not an emulator. ALL ports of Doom, the homebrew versions as well as the officially released versions, use the same .wad files as the DOS version. Most use the same DOS file directly, but even the SNES and Genesis versions use the data originally contained in the DOS .wad. Should we delete all occurrences of Doom except the DOS version?

I don't have the response now (I didn't even know about Exult two minutes ago), but while it basically acts like an emulator, internally it not behaves like one...
The various Doom versions may seem similar, but the real problem with Exult is that it covers many games, quite like [[link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scumm ScummVM]] that "runs" the old LucasArts games.
What about the Wii that plays GameCube games (and perhaps the non-european PS3 running PS2 games)? It's not emulation, there is the old console inside there...

[[quote:But Exult is not an emulator, Its a game engine.]]
[[quote:but the real problem with Exult is that it covers many games, quite like ScummVM]]
And there is the point. Exult acts much like ScummVM by emulating the engine.

I think the best course of action would be to have the "Exult ports" deleted and simply tag the original games with exult that can be run with it. Makes more sense and does't make the precedent for adding all games that can be run on ScummVM (pretty much any game tagged with [[link:/groups/info/scumm scumm]]) to every platform that the "emulator" can be run on.

Edit: Also prevents farther cloning of the games to large number of platforms -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exult#Operating_system_support
Edit 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_engine_recreation might work as a counter argument of sorts.

If the concern is inflated numbers. Then perhaps, we could have a relational link system. Where one game can be marked as 'version of', 'add-on for', 'mod of', 'emulation of', 'collection of', or 'Virtual Machine implementation of' another game. This would keep the entry from being counted as a 'game title' but still allow it to have a different authors, names, release dates, links, publishers, developers, genre, type, flags, multiplayer flags, perspectives, descriptions, comments, tags, release dates, and languages. To save space, an 'of' game would only have its own ID but would simply parrot all the info of the game that it was of. But someone could add something unique to an 'of' game to override the parrot in a particular area. If it got is own type, all the parrot types would be blocked. If it got its own tag, no tag parrots. if it got its own perspective, no perspective parroting. I've actually suggested this before but I'm hoping this slightly new approach coupled with Andrea's updated skills and UVL's updated problems means its a better option now.

It would solve the problem in a fashion, yes. I think I suggested something similar (with less detailed explanation) some time ago already (which was rejected). It would also allow automatic listing of the addons, remakes, etc. in the main game entry too for those interested.

I won't comment about Exult, because I'm not deep enough into this topic. I just wanted to say that seeing "Ultima VII" under platform X-Box looks very very strange. And I would like to see this problem solved somehow by a method that doesn't need to give those versions their own entry.

[[quote:by a method that doesn't need to give those versions their own entry.]]
That would be tagging the original games with exult.

[[quote:*snip* seeing "Ultima VII" under platform X-Box looks very very strange.*snip*]]
But why? Would Doom and Quake for xbox seem strange? These could be made available with the same method as U7.
I'd should also point out that U7 is available on PSP as part of [[gameid:161036 EA Replay]]. An official publishing.

[[quote:But why? Would Doom and Quake for xbox seem strange?]]
Hmm... yes.

Now wait a moment... I found this:
http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1224/Doom/p1/

So there seems to be some kind of official conversion of Doom for Xbox 360. In this case it should get its own entry.

[[quote:In this case it should get its own entry.]]
No, I think the Xbox Live Arcade should be treated like the [[link:/forum/thread/11935/Wii+Virtual+Console Wii Virtual Console]]. Unless it has something more than just ports/remakes of older titles like the WiiVC.

Big names like IGN lists virtual console games as WII games.
This is basically wrong and could be accepted simply because IGN doesn't cover old platforms.

All of the VC games (until now) are emulated roms. i didn't added a XBLA field beside the VC because those games are something more than emulated games. (I wanted to investigate on this but couldn't, yet)
I don't know about the gameplay, but the graphic is usually totally redrawn. If they are not base on the original codes, they should be included in UVL.

About that X360 Doom, the article writes
[[quote:the game has been enhanced with better graphics and 5.1 sound]]
I don't know if this means just stretching the graphic to widescreen resolution or something more... In the former case it should just receive a "XBLA" flag on the DOS version...

After more investigation. x360 doom is based on the code of the version that was included in Doom3 for xbox. In addition to features mentioned above, it has 4 episodes and includes the extra levels and features developed by Vicarious Visions and Nerve Software. There are extensive features added for Xbox Live compition info. There's also 4way split screen for coop and verses. At its core are the original vector perfect levels from the original DOS .wad file, Enhanced textures have been applied to the vectors.

Again, I feel should point out that Doom3 for Linux does exactly what Exult does. Gamers buy the official Windows version of Doom3. Then they download a Linux version of the Doom3 game engine to install on their computer. Files from the Windows version are then copied to a location where the Linux enginf can find them. The differences between Exult and Doom3 are few. The volunteers who created exult have no offical relationship with the creators of U7 and no sourcecode. The volunteer who created the the Doom3 engine for Linux just happens to work for id and had access to sourcecode.

Also, Neverwinter Nights for Linux works this way.

However, the Doom3/NWN ports are official, much more than Exult is at least. They're available from the official websites and likely would've been included in the original media the games were sold on (I have no idea if the later re-releases of NWN did just that) if the publishers would've just waited a moment longer. Exult on the other hand, is a game engine created by reverse engineering the datafiles of U7 and later achieved the full game engine status. Although both can be considered the same, it's still different. Much like Ur-Quan Masters is NOT Star Control 2, despite being a faithful remake of the older game.

We can throw in Quake 2, Abuse, and a large number of other games which have had their sources released and on basis of that duplicate the games on other platforms some volunteer programmers have ported the game on. Fortunately those who've added things like zDoom, have used the project name for the game rather than the game whose WADs it runs. In similar manner, I wouldn't mind seeing Exult itself appearing as a game, but duplicating the games themselves (whose datafiles it can use) is ridiculous, they use the same engine with only their data files changed, AFAIK, there's no separate releases made for each (much like there isn't more than one ScummVM out there).

Edit 4: Exult itself however having its own entry would break the norm by having an entry for a game _engine_, which would be quite wrong. But then again, some Doom "ports" can run Doom, Hexen and Heretic, so them having their own entry would be as bad.

[[quote:However, the Doom3/NWN ports are official]]
Try telling that to the tech when you call for technical support:)
Both of these projects were at the urging of a(the) developer(s) and not solicited by the publishers. I suspect the only reason Infogrames allowed the Linux version is because the developers kept updating their Linux progress reports for over a year on the official BBS. In the press, Infogrames and marketing people kept down playing the "Linux angle" ('we <i>investigating</i> a Linux <i>server</i> because Linux is good at <i>that</i>'). But with BioWare employees constantly saying "Its fully playable in Linux". They couldn't kill it without looking like incompetent villains.

[[quote:much more than Exult is at least. They're available from the official websites]]
Granted, buried deep in the bowls of official FTPs of the companies responsible for these works such files are officially hidden where they be found. Not so at any 'Origin' or EA sites.

[[quote:Exult on the other hand, is a game engine created by reverse engineering the datafiles of U7]]
Well the other projects I have mentioned all had the advantage of sourcecode. Volenteers now working on Exult did ask for the sourcecode. Their queries were not refused, they were instead informed the sourcecode had been lost. (Can you imagine the outcry if the Louvre lost the La Gioconda?!) So it is different in this area. But many ports exist without the benefit of Sourcecode. Sourcecode is a poor criteria to use. For instance, Tengen refused to give Marble Madness sourcecode to Electronic Arts for their official Apple ][ version (actually a smart move considering how often EA misplaces their sourcecode). They only sent them an arcade unit. Also their was no permission to reverse engineer the unit. EA programmers claim they recreated the game from by studding videotapes of themselves playing it. Some games never had sourcecode, yet they were ported to many systems.

[[quote:Exult itself however having its own entry would break the norm by having an entry for a game _engine_, which would be quite wrong.]]
I agreed. Engines should have a group tag, not a game entry. But when a game uses said engine, I think said game should get entries for every platform it runs on.

[[quote:Try telling that to the tech when you call for technical support:)]]
Same problem you encounter with quite a few construction sets. They're completely unsupported even if they were bundled with the release.