Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.kei.com!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!goetz
From: goetz@cs.buffalo.edu (Phil Goetz)
Subject: Re: Choosing your IF setting / genre
Message-ID: <CqMMqs.7on@acsu.buffalo.edu>
Sender: nntp@acsu.buffalo.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: thuban.cs.buffalo.edu
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci
References: <2rlib1$o07@news.tamu.edu> <JAMIE.94May30122237@akeake.its.vuw.ac.nz> <)> <2sbdakINNbh1@life.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 17:47:16 GMT
Lines: 20

In article <2sbdakINNbh1@life.ai.mit.edu>,
David Baggett <dmb@ai.mit.edu> wrote:
>In article <JAMIE.94May30122237@akeake.its.vuw.ac.nz>,
>Jamieson Norrish <jamie@akeake.its.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:
>
>>Besides, you seem to yourself be advocating not allowing the player to
>>do things which will make the game impossible to solve. Why so?
>
>Because this makes the game annoying.  Unlike real life, the game is
>expected to be fair.  If it's not, the player will get frustrated, and
>rightfully so.  I quote from Graham's "Player's Bill of Rights":
>
>  5.  Not to have the game closed off without warning

Generally, the odds of the game being closed off should decrease as the
depth of simulation increases.  Consider reality.  No result is
ever closed off, because there are an infinite number of ways
of achieving it.

Phil goetz@cs.buffalo.edu
