Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!ieunet!tcdcs!rwallace
From: rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)
Subject: Re: Choosing your IF setting / genre
Message-ID: <1994May19.013111.4382@cs.tcd.ie>
Organization: Computer Science, Trinity College Dublin
References: <2r9t9d$ss7@sunb.ocs.mq.edu.au>) <2rdehhINNg68@life.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 01:31:11 GMT
Lines: 22

[Comments about being able to blow things up deleted...]

My opinion about this is that it should be thought of as an interesting
challenge, not something to be avoided.  For example, people don't
restrict games to verb-noun sentences because sophisticated parsers are
harder to write, they write them anyway... Now, in my opinion, the
ability to go around torching everything in sight with a flamethrower
(even if it was only provided for one puzzle and is only useful there)
or cutting things up with an axe (ditto) would do far more to make the
game believable, than the ability to type TELL THE ROBOT TO BURN ALL THE
BOOKS EXCEPT THE BLACK AND RED ONES or suchlike; if people are prepared
to spend huge amounts of effort on the latter, why not the former?  It
needn't be *that* difficult... just record what material everything is
made of, and have a section of code that says objects made of paper will
burn easily (e.g. with a match), objects made of wood will burn with
difficulty (e.g. with a flamethrower), metal and stone won't burn at
all...

-- 
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie
