Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction,rec.games.int-fiction
From: JSwing@nospam.wport.com (JSwing)
Subject: Re: Odp: The Future of Text Adventures II
References: <9572q1$fbm$1@pulp.srv.ualberta.ca> <3A774D66.5631@adamcadre.ac> <JJLd6.10384$AH6.1690561@newsc.telia.net> <3a77eac5.139206147@news.worldonline.nl> <95l44m$nkn$1@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <3a7e5cc6.244819006@goliath2.usenet-access.com>
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.01
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:17:43 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.202.174.129
Message-ID: <3a7f413f_1@news.pacifier.com>
X-Trace: 5 Feb 2001 16:11:43 PDT, 207.202.174.129
Lines: 20
X-Authenticated-User: jswing
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!pacifier!news.pacifier.com!x
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:83095 rec.games.int-fiction:61137

In article <3a7e5cc6.244819006@goliath2.usenet-access.com>, carl@wurb.com (Carl Muckenhoupt) wrote:
>On 5 Feb 2001 02:45:42 GMT, adam@princeton.edu (Adam J. Thornton)
>wrote:
>
>> Is it "fair"
>>(whatever that means) to allow the reader to know more than the
>>detective through the meta-information of "well, since it was in the
>>book, it must be relevant?"
>

Well, if you wanted to be clever, you would let the reader 'know' that the
information in the book was relevant (he will anyway), but write with such
subtlety that it's not immediately obvious how or why or which piece is
relevant.

That way when the pieces come together they form a nice aha! moment for the
player.  Of course, I don't have a good example handy, but we're talking
hypotheticals at this point, yes?

JSwing
