Commercial IF: scientific possibility? (LONG)
Kerovnian
While there have already been threads on this subject, I thought I'd start a
new one, instead of replying to existing ones, because I have a different
point of view.
First of all, let me begin with telling you that I've tried to make a
research on why do people like IF. It was mostly done via structured
interviews and polls, but the results were cross-referenced to see any
correlation with specific personality patterns, and/or general behaviour
tendencies. The research was done on a group of people that have never seen
a textual adventure before, to avoid any biasing.
Note to scientists: groups selected and methods used may be very biased, but
hey, leave the hardcore science in your labs - this is an IF forum! :)))
So what have I come up with?
First some observances which occured as a semi-scientific result (still
statistically significant, if you like). I'll mark people who like IF as Hot
Group, and those that did not like IF as Cold Group.
1. The Hot Group is generally inclined to reading and writing.
2. The Hot Group shows higher IQ and tendency toward (perhaps too strong a
word) mental escapism.
3. The Hot Group does not like modern computer games (ie shooters,
strategies, etc...), but likes role playing.
4. They mostly read SF and fantasy, but that can be a bias due wrongly
selected participants.
Furtherly, here are the reasons why they liked IF. I've sorted the answers
as most frequent at the top, to least frequent at the bottom. The reasons
were not implied, but spontaneously noted by participants:
1. Spoken/written/readable interface
2. Possibility to explore
3. Possibility to manipulate things
4. Possibility to imagine environment/circumstances/feelings/ambience
5. Usage of static images improves gameplay and gives cues to imagination
6. Possibility to customize interface (text color, background color, font
size)
When asked "Would you pay to play such a game", they mostly answered
positively. "Why?"- "Because it is like a book, but even better". "What shou
ld be the price?" - "The same as with books."
Now, talking to them a bit about what would make a great commercial IF, I
came to a conclusion that they would mostly like images of almost all
locations, and of some specific objects, and that they would like sound and
music (introduction of sound was the main reason I conducted the "research).
They said it would then be an interactive book, but with alot of images and
even sound, so "the immersion would be complete".
But what struck me mostly is that they asked me "Where did you find this? I
love it!". This means IF needs to be spread; spread beyond ifarchive.org,
beyond this forum. How will we attract potential players, if they don't know
such games even existed?
And that means *someone* should invest in proper advertisement. And someone
should make a great game: with excellent story and gameplay, excellent
graphics and excellent sound. That requires alot of work, a team, and --
money. Alot of verbs, as least as possible 'guess the verb games', good
descriptions, and puzzles.
Afterall, we are discussing the possibility to make IF commercial again, but
has anyone tried???? Aside to Peter Nepstad's "1893: A World's Fair
Mystery"... And I think he did a good job!
One small point: It just occured to me: How to avoid "guess the verb" game?
Perhaps there should be a metaverb that when applied to an object lists all
the verbs and prepositions that have an impact to it. It is a sort of a hint
system, but does not reveal much. For example:
>examine table
The table is made of wood.
>verbs table
With the wooden table you can do:
- examine it
- put things on it
- put things under it
- hide under it
- move it
Cheers!
--------------------------------------------
Vlad K. / Kerovnian
Kerovnian Dark Ambience
www.kerovnian.com
in...@kerovnian.com
ICQ: 266710683
David Brain
wrote:
>4. They mostly read SF and fantasy, but that can be a bias due wrongly
>selected participants.
Nope, I think that's probably right on the button myself.
--
David Brain
London, UK
Nikita Ayzikovsky
> One small point: It just occured to me: How to avoid "guess the verb" game?
> Perhaps there should be a metaverb that when applied to an object lists all
> the verbs and prepositions that have an impact to it. It is a sort of a hint
> system, but does not reveal much. For example:
>
> >examine table
>
> The table is made of wood.
>
> >verbs table
>
> With the wooden table you can do:
> - examine it
> - put things on it
> - put things under it
> - hide under it
> - move it
>
>
> Cheers!
You forgot
- verbs it
:)
Also, how about
>nouns examine
You can examine:
- yourself
- the room
- the wooden table
- the window
- the book case
- the secret passageway behind the book case
Hm, why do I start thinking that's not a very good idea?..
I believe some element of 'guess the verb' is required to make things
work. Removing it completely will effectively turn IF into CYOA.
Besides, guess the verb can be a very good thing - just look at the
maze in Photopia.
crazydwarf
> 2. The Hot Group shows higher IQ and tendency toward (perhaps too strong a
> word) mental escapism.
> 3. The Hot Group does not like modern computer games (ie shooters,
> strategies, etc...), but likes role playing.
> 4. They mostly read SF and fantasy, but that can be a bias due wrongly
> selected participants.
Well all these apply to me except i do like modern computer games a
bunch. And I like them all and I like a lot of them much more then
RPG's but other then that they all apply to me, well i don't know
about the IQ thing but I am willing to accept that. Well anyways good
job and about advertising I can't realy help I got no money. I am in
highschool.
Daryl McCullough
>I believe some element of 'guess the verb' is required to make things
>work. Removing it completely will effectively turn IF into CYOA.
There are two different phenomena that might be lumped into
"guess the verb":
1. The player has found an object that he believes to be important,
but he's not sure what to do with the object. Does he knock on it,
or talk to it, or throw it, or unlock it, or what?
2. The player has found an object and wants to do something
specific to the object, but he isn't sure how to get the
parser to understand what he wants to do.
An example of the latter may be that (for some reason) the
player wants to pour out a glass of water onto a table. Does
he type "pour out water" or "overturn glass" or "dump out water"
or "knock over glass" or "spill water" or "drop glass" or "throw
glass" or "pour water on table" or what? It's extremely annoying
for the player if he has to discover exactly the right terminology
for what he wants to do.
I agree that the first type of "guess the verb" puzzle is sometimes
okay in a game. The latter type of puzzle is merely annoying.
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
Default User
Daryl McCullough wrote:
>
> order_...@yahoo.com (Nikita Ayzikovsky) says:
>
> >I believe some element of 'guess the verb' is required to make things
> >work. Removing it completely will effectively turn IF into CYOA.
>
> There are two different phenomena that might be lumped into
> "guess the verb":
>
> 1. The player has found an object that he believes to be important,
> but he's not sure what to do with the object. Does he knock on it,
> or talk to it, or throw it, or unlock it, or what?
[snip]
> I agree that the first type of "guess the verb" puzzle is sometimes
> okay in a game. The latter type of puzzle is merely annoying.
Yes. For many players going through Zork I it was a big "ah ha!" moment
when they figured out to "touch" the mirror rather than look in it or
break it. If you had a list of applicable verbs for the object, that
wouldn't be a lot of fun.
Brian Rodenborn
Mike Roberts
> There are two different phenomena that might be lumped
> into "guess the verb":
>
> 1. The player has found an object that he believes to be
> important, but he's not sure what to do with the object.
> Does he knock on it, or talk to it, or throw it, or unlock
> it, or what?
>
> 2. The player has found an object and wants to do
> something specific to the object, but he isn't sure how to
> get the parser to understand what he wants to do.
I wouldn't myself classify #1 as guess-the-verb. The definition of
guess-the-verb that seems most useful to me is that you know the action that
must be performed to solve the puzzle, but the parser won't accept any of
the phrasings that you can think of to express that action. In other words,
my definition of guess-the-verb is limited to user-interface problems with
the parser.
Puzzles of your type #1 fall into several sub-categories. A: The object
might have a use that's not its obvious primary purpose but makes perfect
sense in a physical-reality way: using a credit card to jimmy open a door,
for example. B: The object might be unfamiliar to the player character and
thus not have any obvious use at all, so the proper action to perform on the
object must be determined by examination and/or trial and error: the jeweled
egg in Enchanter. C: The object might have a use that's non-obvious, not
clued within the game, and not sensical in a real-world way, but might
nonetheless have some sort of genre reference that would suggest the action:
the mirror in Zork I. D: The special thing you have to do is completely
arbitrary, not clued within the game and not suggested by any external
reference.
To my way of thinking, A and B are perfectly fair, and have nothing to do
with guess-the-verb. I think C and D are bad puzzle design, but I'd call
these read-the-author's-mind puzzles instead of guess-the-verb puzzles. The
problem isn't that it's hard to figure out how to express the correct
action, it's that there's no reason to think of the correct action in the
first place.
--Mike
mjr underscore at hotmail dot com
Mike Roberts
[minor spoiler for Zork 1]
M
I
N
O
R
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
.
.
.
> For many players going through Zork I it was a big "ah ha!"
> moment when they figured out to "touch" the mirror rather
> than look in it or break it.
That kind of puzzle never worked for me. An "aha" moment to me is one where
you suddenly piece together a bunch of disparate information, or suddenly
understand what something means, and thereby realize what the solution must
be. Touching the mirror in Zork 1 was just a random thing to try. Solving
that kind of puzzle can be pleasing, in that you get a nice surprise when
you actually get an interesting response from a command you never expected
to do anything - but it's not *satisfying* the way it's satisfying to have a
leap of inductive reasoning that turns out to be correct.
> If you had a list of applicable verbs for the object, that
> wouldn't be a lot of fun.
The "touch mirror" sort of puzzle can be amusing once or twice, but how many
times do you really want to play games where that's an element? For me,
once or twice, and I've done it already, so I really don't need another.
So, if we stipulate that that sort of puzzle isn't any fun in the first
place, at least once you get past Advent and Zork 1, would there be any fun
for the verb list to spoil? Not that I'd actually want the verb list to be
there; but I prefer games with the sorts of puzzles where the verb list
*could* be there without spoiling anything.
Papillon
>"Kerovnian" <in...@kerovnian.com> wrote in message news:<bf5er5$h08$1...@fegnews.vip.hr>...
>
>> With the wooden table you can do:
>> - examine it
>> - put things on it
>> - put things under it
>> - hide under it
>> - move it
As those of us with lots of MOO/M* experience know, this can be quite useful
when exploring a strange setting. :) Sure, it's slightly more
restrictive-feeling than a blank parser if the verbs are set in front of you
- but it's still a lot less restrictive than a set of five icons (or a
choice between "click hand on hotspot" and "use object on hotspot")
Of course, my husband refuses to get into IF because he's too lazy... not
only does he want an available list of verbs for any circumstance, but he
also wants to be able to click one of them rather than have to type...
>>nouns examine
>
>You can examine:
> - yourself
> - the room
> - the wooden table
> - the window
> - the book case
> - the secret passageway behind the book case
>
>Hm, why do I start thinking that's not a very good idea?..
Under most systems that passageway wouldn't be available as an option until
it had already been found by searching the bookcase, in which case it would
be perfectly logical to include it on the list.
>I believe some element of 'guess the verb' is required to make things
>work. Removing it completely will effectively turn IF into CYOA.
I wouldn't want this done to all games, but I think it's a perfectly
reasonable approach and probably very helpful for new people.
A standard object has a whole host of verbs that can be applied to it. Most
of them don't do much. (Obviously the engine will need a way to distinguish
between 'Logical to try but doesn't do anything' and 'Doesn't do anything
because it's silly to try this at all' to know which verbs to return.) Those
of us with experience in IF know of this long list of verbs, and if we get
stuck enough, start rattling them off to see if they do anything. Does this
make the game CYOA?
>Besides, guess the verb can be a very good thing - just look at the
>maze in Photopia.
Of course, examining the verblist for most objects wouldn't really give that
away... and the one it would (if it counts - I'm not sure where you'd put
verbs of that category) you might well have done so much earlier in the
game, where it didn't do anything, and still need the insight to get
anywhere.
Kerovnian
> An example of the latter may be that (for some reason) the
> player wants to pour out a glass of water onto a table. Does
> he type "pour out water" or "overturn glass" or "dump out water"
> or "knock over glass" or "spill water" or "drop glass" or "throw
> glass" or "pour water on table" or what? It's extremely annoying
> for the player if he has to discover exactly the right terminology
> for what he wants to do.
>
> I agree that the first type of "guess the verb" puzzle is sometimes
> okay in a game. The latter type of puzzle is merely annoying.
Well, that is exactly what I had in mind. But all these problems you guys
are talking about can be solved very easily. For example, future versions of
TADS can implement "class behaviour" flags, like this:
behaviour= hide_under, put_on, turn, ....
and the object would respond:
>verbs table
With the wooden table you can do:
- hide under it
- put things on it
- turn it on or off
Then, instead of typing all the flags, there can be default behaviours for
classes, like surfaces can be put things on, containers can be inserted with
something etc... But the author can always implement a custom behaviour
list, in a simple string style:
weird object : custom_class
custom_behaviour= "draw a banana on it # slap the monkey with it # do
whatever you need # .... "
Also, for puzzle objects (like that mirror in the Zork), you can always omit
a flag, or take it out if it is a default behaviour:
>verbs mirror
With the mirror you can do:
- break it
- do some things you are not aware of
"-do some things you are not aware of" is a good way to avoid spoiling the
puzzle. The explanation of the object can always be inserted into the hint
system. And the "VERBS" action can be adequately processes for puzzle
objects of unknown types:
>examine the sphere
It is a round, black sphere, made of some material unknown to you. There are
three holes in it.
>verbs sphere
You are not sure what to do with it. All you can guess is that you could
roll it on something toward something else.
>roll the sphere on the floor toward the cones
You roll the sphere, throw it with all the strength you have. It slowly
rolls over the surface and finally hits the cones.....
Now, such meta-hint system is very wellcome in IF, because when we SEE
objects we immediately KNOW what to do with them. When we READ about
objects, we are not so sure, because we have to do some aditional processing
to IMAGINE the sphere, and logical actions do not necessarilly need to occur
to us immediately.
David Thornley
>
>Now, talking to them a bit about what would make a great commercial IF, I
>came to a conclusion that they would mostly like images of almost all
>locations, and of some specific objects, and that they would like sound and
>music (introduction of sound was the main reason I conducted the "research).
>They said it would then be an interactive book, but with alot of images and
>even sound, so "the immersion would be complete".
>
are appropriate sounds. Once you start getting into large numbers of
graphics and sounds you're leaving the possibility of single-author
IF, and there's a lot of problems connected with that. These problems
could be addressed with a new set of authors and structure for creating
the games, but that's not necessarily what we're talking about.
On the other hand, it would help if there were something to distinguish
the commercial games from the free ones. (I suppose just assurance
of quality would work. I can get an almost unlimited amount of bad
fiction, and there will be some gems among it. By paying for the
stuff, or at least getting it from reputable sources, I eliminate
much of the crud.) Some sort of physical package would be good.
>But what struck me mostly is that they asked me "Where did you find this? I
>love it!". This means IF needs to be spread; spread beyond ifarchive.org,
>beyond this forum. How will we attract potential players, if they don't know
>such games even existed?
>
It really seems to me that there should be at least as many people who
potentially like IF as in Infocom's heyday. The IF potential market
has probably grown, although it's much more diluted.
>And that means *someone* should invest in proper advertisement. And someone
>should make a great game: with excellent story and gameplay, excellent
>graphics and excellent sound. That requires alot of work, a team, and --
>money. Alot of verbs, as least as possible 'guess the verb games', good
>descriptions, and puzzles.
>
The proper advertisement is going to be expensive, since the potential
market is so diluted.
>Afterall, we are discussing the possibility to make IF commercial again, but
>has anyone tried???? Aside to Peter Nepstad's "1893: A World's Fair
>Mystery"... And I think he did a good job!
>
Sure. Cascade Mountain Publishing tried going commercial with a true
Infocom-style game and a similar amateur game. It went bust.
That's one of the discouraging things.
>
>
>One small point: It just occured to me: How to avoid "guess the verb" game?
>Perhaps there should be a metaverb that when applied to an object lists all
>the verbs and prepositions that have an impact to it. It is a sort of a hint
>system, but does not reveal much. For example:
>
>>examine table
>
>The table is made of wood.
>
>>verbs table
>
>With the wooden table you can do:
> - examine it
> - put things on it
> - put things under it
> - hide under it
> - move it
>
>
>Cheers!
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------
> Vlad K. / Kerovnian
>
>Kerovnian Dark Ambience
>www.kerovnian.com
>in...@kerovnian.com
>ICQ: 266710683
>
>
--
David H. Thornley | If you want my opinion, ask.
da...@thornley.net | If you don't, flee.
http://www.thornley.net/~thornley/david/ | O-
Quintin Stone
> Also, for puzzle objects (like that mirror in the Zork), you can always omit
> a flag, or take it out if it is a default behaviour:
>
> >verbs mirror
>
> With the mirror you can do:
> - break it
> - do some things you are not aware of
Doesn't this kind of defeat the whole point then? I personally don't care
for the idea of a verb list.
> "-do some things you are not aware of" is a good way to avoid spoiling the
> puzzle. The explanation of the object can always be inserted into the hint
> system.
Isn't a better solution to a touch-the-mirror type of guess-the-verb
problem simply to implement a decent hint system?
/====================================================================\
|| Quintin Stone O- > "You speak of necessary evil? One ||
|| Code Monkey < of those necessities is that if ||
|| Rebel Programmers Society > innocents must suffer, the guilty must ||
|| st...@rps.net < suffer more." -- Mackenzie Calhoun ||
|| http://www.rps.net/ > "Once Burned" by Peter David ||
\====================================================================/
Rexx Magnus
>> With the mirror you can do:
>> - break it
>> - do some things you are not aware of
>
> Doesn't this kind of defeat the whole point then? I personally don't
> care for the idea of a verb list.
It's a bit jarring in the mimesis aspect, I think. Suggesting one
possible use for something that is ambiguous is ok, but listing a whole
ream of possible uses really shouldn't be necessary. For example, a pencil
could be used to write with, you could snap it, or stab something with it.
Lack of a writing surface would exclude the first, the second could be a
pointless act, yet the third could be hinted at by the pencil's
description.
--
UO & AC Herbal - http://www.rexx.co.uk/herbal
To email me, visit the site.
Rob Steggles
"David Thornley" <thor...@visi.com> wrote in message
news:3f17e972$0$179$a186...@newsreader.visi.com...
> are appropriate sounds. Once you start getting into large numbers of
> graphics and sounds you're leaving the possibility of single-author
> IF, and there's a lot of problems connected with that. These problems
> could be addressed with a new set of authors and structure for creating
> the games, but that's not necessarily what we're talking about.
Struggling (visual) artists are (i guess) more common than struggling IF
artists. I'm sure some couldbe persuaded to illustrate a text adventure for
a small advance per picture and their 'sales' could be further increased by
allowing folk to buy signed copies of limited edition prints that htey'd
seen in the game. This strikes me as a potentially viable model. If yu
don'tr even have the advance, most artists already have a portfolio of work
and with a bit of ingenuity, you could work a game around the art, perhaps -
a bit back to front but if we are throwing around ideas about how to make
money then why not? It doesn't have to be representative (ie photographic)
art either.
If you wanted photos, then I'm sure a reasonable digital camera, a copyof
photoshop and an out of work graphic designer friend could be put to similar
use.
As someone (I think it may have been you actually David) said earlier
somewhere else ont his twisty maze of threads, part of the problem is the
over-supply of 'artists' in the field. Well, that argument is true of other
fields too, I believe.
With regard to sounds and voices, (a) there are loads of sound effects out
there already and (b) friends and relatives coud be put to good use acting
out voices of characters. If it's music you want, think of struggling local
musicians.
I agree that it becomes a lot of effort and onemay prefer to spend timeon
other things, but if this is what it takes to makes IF commercial, and that
is what you want to do then it seems a sensible course of action
> much of the crud.) Some sort of physical package would be good.
Agree. Imagination on packaging and merchandising opportunities (for want of
a better term) shoudl come up with some options. Each game will suggest its
own packaging/merchandising opportunities
> >But what struck me mostly is that they asked me "Where did you find this?
I
> >love it!". This means IF needs to be spread; spread beyond ifarchive.org,
> >beyond this forum. How will we attract potential players, if they don't
know
> >such games even existed?
Marketing. Let's identify the targets first. And then figure out ways to
reach them. (Help - I have been in suitworld far tooooooo long ;-))
> It really seems to me that there should be at least as many people who
> potentially like IF as in Infocom's heyday. The IF potential market
> has probably grown, although it's much more diluted.
Agree. I want to talk more about better defining these markets and how to
reach them (see my other posts for my thoughts)
> >And that means *someone* should invest in proper advertisement. And
someone
> >should make a great game: with excellent story and gameplay, excellent
> >graphics and excellent sound. That requires alot of work, a team, and --
> >money. Alot of verbs, as least as possible 'guess the verb games', good
> >descriptions, and puzzles.
Yes, but we need to know who we are aiming at *first*, and roughly what sort
of game would appeal to at least have some idea that all the effort will be
worth it.
Am I sounding like a stuck record yet????
Rob Steggles
Default User
Mike Roberts wrote:
>
> "Default User" <first...@company.com> wrote:
> [minor spoiler for Zork 1]
Oh, ok. There could be people reading the group that haven't played it.
> M
> I
> N
> O
> R
>
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> .
> .
> .
> > For many players going through Zork I it was a big "ah ha!"
> > moment when they figured out to "touch" the mirror rather
> > than look in it or break it.
>
> That kind of puzzle never worked for me. An "aha" moment to me is one where
> you suddenly piece together a bunch of disparate information, or suddenly
> understand what something means, and thereby realize what the solution must
> be.
Sure those are fun too. Some of the puzzles in Zork were "figure 'em
outs", some were like the mirror, you knew you had to do something, what
could it be. Some were accidental solves. I didn't sove the rainbow
intentially, I thought that using the spepter would part the waters of
the stream and let you cross. That's more of a "huh!"
Things like the bell book and candle (helps a lot if you are familiar
with that phrase) are more like what you are discribing. What made Zork
fun was that it mixed in a bunch of different things.
> The "touch mirror" sort of puzzle can be amusing once or twice, but how many
> times do you really want to play games where that's an element?
Wouldn't bother me.
> For me,
> once or twice, and I've done it already, so I really don't need another.
> So, if we stipulate that that sort of puzzle isn't any fun in the first
> place, at least once you get past Advent and Zork 1, would there be any fun
> for the verb list to spoil?
It would still spoil things that are logical but that you haven't
thought of. It removes some of the analytical part of the game.
Here's an example (since it's one of mine, I'll not say it is a *good*
example, others may find it dumb, obscure or trivial).
examine statue
This is a brass statuette, depicting a noble-looking squirrel striking a
pose for posterity. A closer examination shows a small line running
around the base of the statue.
Now, you are supposed to figure out that it means that the statue can be
opened in some fashion. If you have a verb list for the item includes
"open" then it ain't much of a puzzle.
> Not that I'd actually want the verb list to be
> there; but I prefer games with the sorts of puzzles where the verb list
> *could* be there without spoiling anything.
You could provide the entire list of verbs for point-n-click purposes, I
suppose.
Brian Rodenborn
Adam Thornton
There's your problem.
A mimesis works much better in a pot--preferably a well-drained clay
pot--than in a jar.
Unless you're making mimesis jelly, but I must say, it's not
particularly nice.
Adam
Michael Vondung
wrote:
>But what struck me mostly is that they asked me "Where did you find this? I
>love it!".
/delurk
*nods* I've encountered the same. Frequently, I introduce younger folk
to IF, and in many cases they greatly enjoy the "new genre" that they
had never even heard of before. Most of us (who were born in the early
seventies or before) remember "text adventures" vividly, but the "new
generation" apparently isn't even aware of this type of "game".
I have mixed feelings about the recent "Let's Make IF Commercially
Viable" movement, but yes, if you want to sell something, you first
need to make people aware that your "product type" exists at all. It's
a little ironic that people talk about "commercializing" IF at a point
in time where the software industry as whole is slowly moving towards
Open Source.
-M.
Daniel Dawson
written by Michael Vondung <mvon...@gmx.net>. It says:
>need to make people aware that your "product type" exists at all. It's
>a little ironic that people talk about "commercializing" IF at a point
>in time where the software industry as whole is slowly moving towards
>Open Source.
Why? Open Source does not preclude commercialism, although it still seems to be
in the stages where it's difficult to be successful.
--
| Email: Daniel Dawson <ddawson at icehouse.net> ifMUD: DanDawson |
| Web: http://www.icehouse.net/ddawson/ X-Blank: intentionally blank |
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Adrien Beau
>
>> They said it would then be an interactive book, but with alot
>> of images and even sound, so "the immersion would be complete".
>
> That could be a problem: images are not necessarily easy to
> get, neither are appropriate sounds. Once you start getting
> into large numbers of graphics and sounds you're leaving the
> possibility of single-author IF, and there's a lot of problems
> connected with that.
Indeed, but such collaborations and such problems are not new, and
have been worked around (or should I say "worked beyond"?) many
times. I'm thinking particularly of collaborations between
writers and illustrators (many novels have been illustrated), and
movie creators and musicians (most movies have a soundtrack).
--
spam....@free.fr
You have my name and my hostname: you can mail me.
(Put a period between my first and last names).