Message from discussion Locked out of LifeIn19
Received: by 10.66.72.165 with SMTP id e5mr2509375pav.4.1345577648823;
Tue, 21 Aug 2012 12:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Steere <markste...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Locked out of LifeIn19
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1345577648 18223 127.0.0.1 (21 Aug 2012 19:34:08 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 19:34:08 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: oi9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=188.8.131.52; posting-account=uEOgRAoAAAASMp5oEBx_0d7qfHMcYtcE
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Aug 21, 10:10 am, Robert Jasiek <jas...@snafu.de> wrote:
> I don't get it: do you belief that Go is deeper or no deeper than
> many modern games?
I believe that some modern games must be just as deep as Go. One is
expected to play Go 100 times. Why don't you play Oust 100 times and
make a case that Go is deeper. I could use a good laugh.
> >Not every ancient game has spanned the centuries.
> > If
> > Go had not been invented before now, it would certainly be
> > invented by me or one of my fellow designers.
> It is not straightforward to reinvent exactly a same game but
> surely something similar.
Well, obviously. Go has a number of variations on this planet. I'm
talking about the surround-and-capture mechanism on a square grid of
some size. Two players, two different colored stones, etc.
> E.g., a game could let stones be placed in the
> facets instead of on the intersections.
That's a cosmetic parameter that means exactly shit squat. Wise up.
> >My games are played at 16 games sites, far more
> >than any other designer.
> Great, but irrelevant here:)
I don't give a fuck what you consider relevant here. I'll talk about
the dog shit on Steve Jobs' (estate's) lawn, a block from where I