Newsgroups: rec.games.int-fiction
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.vt.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!buzzard
From: buzzard@world.std.com (Sean T Barrett)
Subject: Re: Limited savings
Message-ID: <GKpt2u.JBI@world.std.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 04:13:42 GMT
References: <ec22c08e.0110011143.5cc280a1@posting.google.com> <EMhu7.15189$KJ4.2404235@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com> <79d462f4.0110040208.67b5ba5f@posting.google.com> <9phkro$kjh$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Lines: 15
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.games.int-fiction:65704

Jon Ingold <ji207@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>How about, say, a very short game with not much to do where Saving and
>Undoing are never really necessary, except right at the very end... but at
>the end, there's something of a twist, so that the author wishes to _force_
>the player to replay through the whole thing again and look at it in a new
>light? Then there's something to be gained from the player doing it, though
>he might not realise at the time.

This might be ok if the game were impossible to make unwinnable,
but if it were to, say, also include a turn-based time limit,
the inability to save/restore might cause players to get frustrated
with the game experience before they ever win it and experience
the twist, much less replay it a second time.

SeanB
