This is the mail archive of the xconq7@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Xconq project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: variants for all games


>My memory is full of holes (HSE, Human Spongiform Encephaly, aka mad
>nerd disease :-) ), but I think my concern was that it enabled
>variants in games for which they didn't make any sense or even
>defeated the purpose of the game.  I thought I manually added all the
>plausible (to me :-) ) variants to the extant game library at some
>later point.

That's how I remember the discussion, too. I don't think either you or I
ever went through the game library, though.

>There is a general decision to make here, which is how much control
>do you want to give to module authors.  My original theory was that
>Xconq is a platform for game development, which means that the game
>designer should be able to control exactly what the players see, up
>to and including the list of variant options available.  But that's
>a pretty high bar to maintain, perhaps higher than is really necessary.

Yes, I would argue that basic variants like world-seen always should be
available as player options. And also whether or not the AI can resign.
Different people prefer to play the same game in slightly different ways.
Which is how the present discussion got started.

Hans

Hans Ronne

hronne@pp.sbbs.se



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]