Re: Intelligence
- From: "AngleWyrm" <anglewyrm_idontreadspamthankyou@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 03:29:57 -0800
"Derek Ray" <derek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrnfiuq3k.hpf.derek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 2007-11-05, Tina Hall <Tina_Hall@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
list from the screen. That's awkward, but the possiblility already
exists. Having it automated just saves me the work.
Right. And it's the work (or lack thereof) that's part of the game.
For example, a commonly rejected YANI is "add warning before hitting a
floating eye or stepping into lava or (insert dangerous thing here)".
Why is it rejected when it's a simple interface change to warn the
player?
Because making an _interface_ improvement ("warn of danger") changes
the way the actual game is played. In Nethack, the player must learn
A game should provide a clue. If a player ignores the clues, then they are
clueless by ignorance. In this way, it becomes truly the player's fault.
Lava, by it's name is not safe to step on. It doesn't need safety rails, it
needs a little care to walk around it. If I run around a lava-filled room,
and key-slip into a pool, that's my bad. So to, with the creature called a
Disenchanter--the name says it all. And if I hear the howling of wolves at
the moon, I'm going to watch out for that little 'd'.
Floating eyes are different from the above examples in this respect: There
is no clue that contact will paralyze you. It implements a designer's wish
that the player should learn the hard way. This is a mistake; the
cluelessness of a designer, looking for expression. The fault should to rest
with the player.
Do I think floating eyes should change? It's too late for that. But it's not
too late to learn from our mistakes, and do better with new stuff.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Intelligence
- From: Derek Ray
- Floating eyes out of the blue? (was: Re: Intelligence)
- From: Tina Hall
- Re: Intelligence
- From: Philipp Lucas
- Re: Intelligence
- References:
- Re: Intelligence
- From: Rachel Elizabeth Dillon
- Re: Intelligence
- From: Tina Hall
- Re: Intelligence
- From: Derek Ray
- Re: Intelligence
- Prev by Date: Digging into shops. WAS: Intelligence
- Next by Date: Re: Intelligence
- Previous by thread: Re: Intelligence
- Next by thread: Re: Intelligence
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|