The state of pbm
Evilb
'Professional' (I prefer the word commercial), GM's defend themselves
and the quality of their games, whilst all the while, there is an ever
growing tide of free games pouring onto the scene.
Many ppl agree that pbm, for want of a better phrase 'isn't what it
used to be', although others flatly refuse to believe this.
I'm currently developing be free pbem that I hope will pull my little
corner of the market further towards the PC games market. Ppl have
asked what will happen to all those without a PC, or a net connection.
Well, I'm not trying to cater for everyone, but at the same time,
using todays technology, I can easily cater for international players
that a few years ago, would have been impossible to do. I may even
introduce a play by disk method for those without a net connection in
the future, I don't know yet.
I'd be very interested to hear from players in current computer
moderated games, what features they like, and what they'd like to see.
The game engine I'm writing will not be specific to any genre, but
will use templates to style it to a particular era, so where possible,
make your suggestions generic.
Players will use Windows based client software to view their turn
reports so suggestions don't need to be limited to anything that can
be done using traditional paper based games.
I'd like this to be an interactive process, and I will chart progress
in this group, as it occurs.
Carol Mulholland
> an ever growing tide of free games pouring onto the scene.
>
Free and very-low-cost games have always been a significant
part of the PBM scene. I don't think that this is a novel
feature.
Good luck to you, sez I: the more good games the better.
But I wonder whether it's good PR (a) to post messages under a
pseudonym or (b) to knock existing games.
Carol
Evilb
Well carol, we'll see.
I want this business to survive just like anyone else.
Mark Grimbley
Carol Mulholland <Ca...@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:VA.00001322.0092e9f1@superk...
> Free and very-low-cost games have always been a significant
> part of the PBM scene. I don't think that this is a novel
> feature.
>
computers the sheer number of quality free PBeM's has grown to the point
where commercial PBM's will find it extremely difficult to survive. So while
the original statement above may be true that it is not novel it has
certainly become more significant.
You might also want to consider that with the advent of online gaming
(Archmage) and online worlds such as Everquest and Ultima, why bother with
a turn based game at all?
Before the computerisation of PBM's most games were hand processed and even
hand written, which gave the feeling of interaction between you and the GM,
computerised games are to a large extent sterile in their nature. This fact
alone probably explains the hugh popularity of Ultima and Everquest, real
time interaction and feedback and a constantly evolving plot/world. How can
PBM's compete against that?
There will always be a market for PBMs but I personally believe it will be a
decreasing market, and one where the commercial will eventually become
extinct.
if anyone has any comments I'l be interested to read them
Roy/Day One
Mark Grimbley <doc...@grimbley.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7r2u6t$ns6$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
Evilb
developing had a different angle because it was free, it was simply a
matter of fact statement.
And yes, in answer to the posters comments, without something new to
keep their interest, pbm will, and I believe has already to some
extent become marginalised.
I do however think that there is a market for pbm. Certain games, by
their nature, just aren't very playable in real time, there can be too
much complexity, and a turn based system seems the logical solution.
Civ2 is a good example of this style of game.
MadCentral
computers the sheer number of quality free PBeM's has grown to the point
where commercial PBM's will find it extremely difficult to survive.<<
You know the weird thing about comments like this? They dont seem to be based
on any actual facts! You guys have heard somebody say something and just taken
it to heart because it sounds right.
I'm not going to get into this again, because I am aware there are some
free-pbm fanatics on the list and its pointless to argue with them. But I will
say this; I can't speak for all other commercial companies, but I can speak for
mine. We are showing another year of consistent *growth*. We get a great many
new players at a constant rate. We do not run games for free, nor even cheap,
but at a fair price for the work we do. Things are looking rosy here, and they
are also looking rosy for our USA counterpart. So we are living proof that
there's nothing wrong with the commercial PBM hobby. If it's done right,
there's plenty of life in it.
>> So while
the original statement above may be true that it is not novel it has
certainly become more significant.<<
I think free games are great. I think *any* good games are great. More power
to them! I do not believe that they affect what I do at all. I know that
people out there will accuse me of ''sticking my head in the sand''. They can
continue to accuse me of this for as long as they like. Doesn't bother me at
all.
>>You might also want to consider that with the advent of online gaming
(Archmage) and online worlds such as Everquest and Ultima, why bother with
a turn based game at all?<<
These games have a little more effect than the free ones, but still not much.
The *main* problem there is that they cost money and take time, which is less
money and time for commercial PBMs. I haven't lost many players to online
games, but certainly more than I have to free ones. Even so, I do not feel
threatened by them. There is a distinct difference between PBM and online
games. They target a different market, although there is some crossover.
>>Before the computerisation of PBM's most games were hand processed and even
hand written, which gave the feeling of interaction between you and the GM,
computerised games are to a large extent sterile in their nature.<<
This sort of sweeping statement doesnt actually say much. Unless you have
played *all* pbms, you are just talking
about your own sphere of reference. I can assure you that there are many
computer-mod games which still give a feeling or interaction with other players
and the GMs.
>> This fact
alone probably explains the hugh popularity of Ultima and Everquest, real
time interaction and feedback and a constantly evolving plot/world. How can
PBM's compete against that?<<
''real time interaction'' PBMs don't attempt to compete with. That's the whole
point. Diplomacy in your own time has its benefits. It doesn't need to
''compete'' at all. As for constantly evolving plot/world.... Ultima and
Everquest don't offer any more of that than our own game, DungeonWorld.
>>There will always be a market for PBMs but I personally believe it will be a
decreasing market, and one where the commercial will eventually become
extinct.<<
And I would add that I was reading the same thing in very similar words five
years ago. Yet here we still are, growing and expanding. I really don't mind
how many people think it though. Time will tell.
>>if anyone has any comments I'l be interested to read them<<
I hope my comments have been interesting.
Steve
-Madhouse UK
Greg Lindahl
> But I wonder whether it's good PR (a) to post messages under a
> pseudonym or (b) to knock existing games.
I wonder whether it's good PR to (c) re-open cans of worms. I know a
well known musician who posts using his nickname. OH MY GOD! It's
great PR, actually.
-- g
Carol Mulholland
> Before the computerisation of PBM's most games were hand processed
and even hand written, which gave the feeling of interaction between
you and the GM,
Er, no, computer-mods have existed for as long as hand-mods. Indeed,
the first commercial PBM game was FBI's computer-moderated 'Nuclear
Destruction'.
> computerised games are to a large extent sterile in their nature.
But this was seen as an advantage by players who wanted to interact
with each other rather than with the GM.
There are plenty of good hand-mods still around, if that's your own
preference.
Carol
Evilb
Thankyou for the support.
I didn't post under an alias for any particular reason. It used to be
an old Quake2 multiplayer player name I used, and its kinda stuck, its
just what I post under. No conspiracy, nothing.
Kerry Harrison
>You might also want to consider that with the advent of online gaming
>(Archmage) and online worlds such as Everquest and Ultima, why bother with
>a turn based game at all?
Archmage (the web game, not to be confused with the PBM game which came
first) is nothing but a gussied up BBS Door game. That kind of game can be
great fun if you've got the time to check in each day, but tends to get old
fast for someone used to the depth most PBMs provide, and there doesn't seem
to be much crossover between the people who play Archmage and those that
play PBMs.
EQ and Ultima are basically graphical MUDs that cater to the computer RPG
crowd and those that have time to spend on roleplaying games but don't have
groups to game with. Now there is crossover here with PBMs and these games
seem to be pre-empting some of the folks that would have come to PBMs
eventually (and I've seen some PBMers leave PBM and go to these games) but
the impact on our business has been small. It'll be interesting to see if
these big online games can keep players interest for decades like the
open-ended PBM games have.
Now as to the question of why bother with turn based games at all, i.e.
PBMs. Simple - they're the most convenient form of game to play for a lot
of people that like to game but have professional careers (and those that
like to game but locked away from society due to their crimes, i.e. prison
inmates). A survey of almost any US PBM company's player base will show
that the vast majority of their players are either professionals, military,
or inmates (and students if you're talking about UK companies). Oh yeah,
another reason to play PBMs is that they're also fun, but the primary reason
is that they're convenient.
Kerry
Paul Walker
>computers the sheer number of quality free PBeM's has grown to the point
>where commercial PBM's will find it extremely difficult to survive. So while
This is assuming that everyone playing commercial games will switch to free
ones, though. Some people just prefer commercial games to a freebie, myself
included.
--
Paul
To email me, change nospam to black-sun.
Paul Walker
>make your suggestions generic.
>Players will use Windows based client software to view their turn
>reports so suggestions don't need to be limited to anything that can
>be done using traditional paper based games.
First suggestion - make more clients. Not everyone wants or uses Windows, or
indeed have it. ;-) In fact, most network related things are far easier
under other OSs, let alone programming APIs and so forth .. the win32 one
is, well, ew.
Rob Harper
and immediacy of online games, but I think there will always be a place for
turn-based games (whether distributed by post or email) which can be played
off-line. After all, novels are still popular, despite the availability of
movies, which give the same stories in a faster, flashier and easier to
access format.
This is not to say that we of the PBM industry can sit back and assume there
will always be a market. We have to keep looking for ways to improve our
games and the format in which they are presented. Just don't automatically
assume that *everyone* wants to play, say, Ultima Online instead of
Chronicle.
--
Rob.
-------------------------------------------
State of Mind [Games by post and die rolls by proxy.]
Website: www.homestead.com/stateofmind
E-mail: state...@breathemail.net
Our motto: "Hit it harder."
Carol Mulholland
> I didn't post under an alias for any particular reason.
I wasn't implying that you did, but I do think that a
pseudonym risks diminishing your credibility with potential
players.
No reason why you shouldn't launch as Evilb Games, of
course, so we know you've fulfilled your vow.
Carol
Greg Lindahl
> This is assuming that everyone playing commercial games will switch to free
> ones, though. Some people just prefer commercial games to a freebie, myself
> included.
Sounds like it's time for a blind test...
-- g
Sam Palmer
I probably have the most limited knowledge of the PbeM and PBM after all
I have only been involved for about 2 years.
I think or believe that Free PBm and PbeM games are a stepping stone
into commercial Pbem and PBM.
The potential players logs onto the Internet see's these commercial
PbeM. They are not too sure about them so join a free PbeM and play that
for a couple of months.
I also believe that free games are not very structured after all they
are run by hobby GMs who also have a real job so don't have that much
time.
Anyway the GM of the free game points the player in the direction of a
commercial game web-site and they sign up to play, because they want
more structure game.
Later on that player may become involved with PBM. Free games offer a
stepping stone into the industry.
Another point that I forgot to mention, Commerical PBM can not be losing
out with out free and commerical PBeM and PBM losing out. Same point as
above just put different.
Anyway just had to say that..
Sam Palmer
--
Sam Palmer
Greg Lindahl
> I wasn't implying that you did, but I do think that a
> pseudonym risks diminishing your credibility with potential
> players.
Or increases his credibility, because he's not anal-retentive like
some of the people who've been whining about pseudonyms ever since
BBSes were created.
-- g
Bobbins
Flagship would be the ideal vehicle (in the UK) to carry out a survey
of its readers? Questions like age, income, access to email and
computers, play free games and/or commercial games, best pbm company,
length of time playing games etc etc??? There are lots of questions
you could ask if you thought about it. Perhaps then there would be
some evidence to fall back on every time you lot have this
interminable debate!
(Maybe this has been done before in the past, but being relatively new
to PBM I'd be interested to see the results of something like this?)
Bobbins
Mark Grimbley
that they used to do what you've suggested. I rather suspect that they still
do. I'm sure I'll be swiftly rubuked if this isn't the case.
what your actually suggesting is called market research, where an industry
tries to determine where its market actually is and how best to sell itself.
I could go further in my opinions on this but I don't think I've enough
bread and marshmallows to toast on the resulting heat. I will ask one
question though,
How many PBM's have been conceived purely as a method to make money as
opposed to trying to make money from a hobby?
Not meaning to be contentious here and I am genuinely interested if anyone
has an answer, as for myself I have no idea (to either anything or the
answer to the question - lol)
Bobbins <ke...@okeefe.u-net.com> wrote in message
news:37d580db.14293186@news...
ColinForbes
> Has anyone actually done a survey of PBM players? I would think
> Flagship would be the ideal vehicle (in the UK) to carry out a survey
> of its readers? Questions like age, income, access to email and
> computers, play free games and/or commercial games, best pbm company,
> length of time playing games etc etc???
I did this when launching GWF about three years ago. I got responses for
just over 400 people. I can dig the results out if anyone's interested.
Obviously the data's a little out of date, but made interesting reading
with regard to age, income etc - both were higher than I thought.
Colin.
Paul Walker
>> This is assuming that everyone playing commercial games will switch to free
>> ones, though. Some people just prefer commercial games to a freebie, myself
>> included.
>Sounds like it's time for a blind test...
In what way, exactly? I'm not talking about the quality of the games, just to
make that clear. They may be, and probably some are, great. It's more the GM
angle I was thinking of.
On the commercial->free part, who needs a test? You can see a parallel in
the way the ISP market is here - we have many, many free ISPs now, and yet
there are still many people using the commercial ones instead of switching.
Paul Walker
>Or increases his credibility, because he's not anal-retentive like
>some of the people who've been whining about pseudonyms ever since
>BBSes were created.
Hey Greg - do you have to go to classes to learn how to be this abrasive, or
is it just something that comes *naturally* to you?
Steve Pritchard
Greg Lindahl wrote in message <7r3j2i$28...@news2.newsguy.com>...
>Carol Mulholland <Ca...@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>> I wasn't implying that you did, but I do think that a
>> pseudonym risks diminishing your credibility with potential
>> players.
>
>some of the people who've been whining about pseudonyms ever since
>BBSes were created.
I have more respect for any opinion that comes from someone willing to
put their name to it.
Someone saying something controversial with a name like "Darth Vader the
Evil Overlord" isn't going to get me to take him all that seriously.
Evilb
wrote:
>On 7 Sep 1999 17:46:58 GMT, Greg Lindahl wrote:
>
>>Or increases his credibility, because he's not anal-retentive like
>>some of the people who've been whining about pseudonyms ever since
>>BBSes were created.
>
>Hey Greg - do you have to go to classes to learn how to be this abrasive, or
>is it just something that comes *naturally* to you?
>
The very same could be said of you sir.
And anyway, whats in a name ?
Evilb
wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Sep 1999 08:51:08 GMT, Evilb wrote:
The initial release will be windows only, but it should be relatively
easy to port to other platforms because it will use standard pop3/smtp
protocols.
Ken Mulholland
> I have to admit that I haven't read Flagship in a long while, but I know
> that they used to do what you've suggested. I rather suspect that they still
> do. I'm sure I'll be swiftly rubuked if this isn't the case.
> tries to determine where its market actually is and how best to sell itself.
> I could go further in my opinions on this but I don't think I've enough
> bread and marshmallows to toast on the resulting heat. I will ask one
> question though,
>
Hollows Exmouth Devon, EX8 1QT UK.
Ken Mulholland
Telling the truth gets you into just as much
trouble as telling lies - only it's quicker.
Evilb
>Hollows Exmouth Devon, EX8 1QT UK.
Just around the corner then.
Exeter based here.
Carol Mulholland
> I can dig the results out if anyone's interested
Yup, I remember this: I think your results would still be valid
enough to be worth repeating.
In Flagship we publish ratings polls for games (Anticipation, GM
Quality, Depth, Interaction and ValueforMoney), and also readers'
opinions on various points arising issue by issue as part of our
Feedback coverage.
Carol
mlwilliams
>
> Carol Mulholland <Ca...@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:VA.00001322.0092e9f1@superk...
> > Free and very-low-cost games have always been a significant
> > part of the PBM scene. I don't think that this is a novel
> > feature.
> >
> where commercial PBM's will find it extremely difficult to survive. So while
> certainly become more significant.
> (Archmage) and online worlds such as Everquest and Ultima, why bother with
> a turn based game at all?
> hand written, which gave the feeling of interaction between you and the GM,
> alone probably explains the hugh popularity of Ultima and Everquest, real
> time interaction and feedback and a constantly evolving plot/world. How can
> PBM's compete against that?
>
> decreasing market, and one where the commercial will eventually become
> extinct.
I run a commerical PBM - 90% of my players are on-line now. I still have
to turn people away and the low level of drop-outs has remained
unchanged over the ten years that have ushered the inter-net into
England.
Mark
--
Saturnalia
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5676/sat.html
I'm sorry, I can't argue unless you've paid.
Carol Mulholland
> Exeter based here.
Call in for a copy, then. (But check date/time first as life's hectic
at the moment and we've visitors this weekend - post'll be quicker.) Or
meet for a drink in Exeter.
Carol
Carol Mulholland
> whats in a name ?
Well, the substance of the whole play - including the deaths of Tybalt,
Mercutio (sob), Romeo and Juliet herself, who asked this question.
Carol
Steve Pritchard
Evilb wrote in message <37d6282b...@news.dial.pipex.com>...
So you are going to write a world beating PBM, you are UK based, and you
didn't even now the address of Flagship?
What in that statement suggests that you haven't really done at all that
much research into your new venture?
Evilb
I used to read flagship, but no longer do. Is this some sort of crime
?
I've played enough games to know that there is a yawning divide
between what can be achieved, and what is currently out there.
My interests lie predominantly with electronic media and the internet,
and it is here that I am focusing my attention.
Whether you think anything I produce in the future is good or bad
doesn't really matter. I know I will try my best, and thats all that
counts.
You never know, you may be licensing my stuff in the future... :)
Aaron-Dirk Boyden
I thought it was pretty clear that the Montagues and the Capulets just
liked conflict (provided it didn't interrupt their parties); I'm sure
they would have found some other excuse to fight had they had the same
name.
--
Aaron Boyden
"We are told so little that incredulity cannot gain a foothold. I
suppose that is one way to gain credibility. It is not a good way."
-David Lewis
Mark Grimbley
is an authors edit of Romeo & Juliet. In this edit the reason for the feud
is clearly explained as Lady Capulet had slept with Lord Montague shortly
after her marraige to Lord Capulet. The consequence of this liason meant
that Romeo and Juliet were in actual fact half brother and sister.
Hence the hatred for Lord Montague by Lord Capulet and the attempts to stop
Romeo and Juliet from seeing one another.
But due to censorship at that time, this aspect of the play had to be
removed. Plus the fact that there would have been an extra 134 pages of
dialogue, given the fact that Shakesperean plays are fairly long as it is
and the untimely demise of the author, it was therefore never put back in.
This has absolutely nothing to do with PBM but it does answer the previous
responses quote
"I'm sure they would have found some other excuse to fight had they had the
same name."
The fact is they indeed have the same name, and yet still fought.
Mark
ps. for those of you who haven't twigged yet - this is a joke, I can imagine
Monty Python doing a sketch of this you know.
Henry Penninkilampi
Pritchard" <st...@spelbind.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >Just around the corner then.
> >Exeter based here.
>
> So you are going to write a world beating PBM, you are UK based, and you
> didn't even now the address of Flagship?
>
> What in that statement suggests that you haven't really done at all that
> much research into your new venture?
<FLAME>
Grow up Steve, and stop being so petty.
No-one gives a rats about the physical location of Flagship. Even if they
*are* subscribers, all they care about is the quality of the magazine and
the regularity with which issues reach their doorstep. Knowing (or not
knowing) the address of Flagship means absolutely nothing.
If you've got nothing better to do that sit one UseNet all day and
nit-pick, then you really need to go out and get a life. Take up
worm-farming or something.
The last thing that someone in *your* position should be doing is pissing
in the pocket of every person who is enthusiastic about a new idea, has a
different viewpoint, or somehow challenges the status quo. If you want
your darling industry to survive then you need to start encouraging new
blood to have a go. Hell, you might even want to consider getting off
your arse and *helping* them, rather than revelling in complacency like a
pig in swill.
Who cares how long you've been doing this, or how sucessful you've been.
Big, fat dinosaurs ruled the Earth once, undisputed, and they got wiped
out. Overnight. Only the species that were flexible enough to adapt to
the new conditions survived. Well, guess what buddy-boy? The Internet
has brought with it an entirely new set of conditions. If you want to
survive then you need to be flexible and adapt. That means opening your
mind to new ideas, hedging your bets with new approaches, not burning down
bridges *before* you come to them, and certainly not burning down bridges
just to spite everyone else who thinks differently.
The same applies to a stack of other old-timers in this newsgroup that
have their heads in the sand and arses in the air, just waiting to get
booted. Carol wrote some tripe about PBM not being dead until the Rumours
column of Flagship dries up. What a pathetically narrow, blinkered and
coloured view. "The industry's not dead until our little magazine says it
is." God, how arrogant!
Do you people ever listen to yourselves?
</FLAME>
Henry.
MadCentral
doesn't really matter. I know I will try my best, and thats all that
counts.
You never know, you may be licensing my stuff in the future... :)<<
Now *that* is a *much* better attidude than the one you started with. Good for
you.
Steve
-Madhouse UK
Evilb
Mark Grimbley
general I think.
Henry Penninkilampi <spam...@metropolis.net.au> wrote in message
news:spamfree-080...@d7.metropolis.net.au...
MadCentral
Steve Pritchard was making a pretty fair point, I think.
>>No-one gives a rats about the physical location of Flagship.<<
Anybody who plans to run a successful PBM or PBeM commercial business in UK
*does* give a rats arse about it, actually. Since its the primary form of
communication concerning the hobby in this country. Besides which, the actual
point he was making was that the poster of the original message needed to do a
little research into the hobby. It makes common sense, if you are planning to
make the ''worlds greatest ever game'' don't you think?
>> Even if they
*are* subscribers, all they care about is the quality of the magazine and
the regularity with which issues reach their doorstep. Knowing (or not
knowing) the address of Flagship means absolutely nothing.<<
Its quite handy if you want to write to them for the letters page, or to renew
your sub, or to send in rumours, or to write to Spokesmen Speak, and to write
to ''feedback'' and so on and so forth. Or to send advert copy. Or ask for ad
prices. Or pay for adverts. or alternatively, you could post your letter to
''Santa Claus'' and hope it gets there. Of course, you could email or
telephone this stuff, but the term ''address'' is a general one not just
applying to postal address.
>>If you've got nothing better to do that sit one UseNet all day and
nit-pick, then you really need to go out and get a life. Take up
worm-farming or something.<<
Is there an immediate need to slam somebody for a fairly reasonable comment, do
you think? If you want to flame, we can *all* do that. ((Perhaps Worm-Farming
is your thing... to make you feel more ''adequate?'')) Pointless really
though.
>>The last thing that someone in *your* position should be doing is pissing
in the pocket of every person who is enthusiastic about a new idea, <<
Steve wasn't pissing, as you so pleasantly put it, in anybodys pocket. He was,
as I was too, putting a jumped-up grandstander in his place. Genuine good
ideas are great. ''Im gonna make the best game ever'' is neither an idea nor a
promotion for the hobby. Its just another tiresome claim that'll most-probably
amount to nothing.
>>has a
different viewpoint, or somehow challenges the status quo.<<
Try reading the thread. You'll see that your viewpoint on it is skewed.
Nobody slammer new ideas. Nobody ''challenged the status quo''. Somebody just
made big claims with nothing to back them up and was shot down for it.
>> If you want
your darling industry to survive then you need to start encouraging new
blood to have a go. <<
Oh. I see. And we *dont* do that, huh?
Do you actually have a clue what you are
talking about?
>> Hell, you might even want to consider getting off
ur arse and *helping* them, <<
People with genuine ideas we are happy to help. Spellbinder, Madhouse, Time
Patterns.. and the various other commercial PBM GMs are always happy to help.
Our hobby thrives on cooperation. We just don't have time for time-wasters.
>>rather than revelling in complacency like a
pig in swill.<<
You talk real big from an anonymous address in an anonymous place.
>>Who cares how long you've been doing this, or how sucessful you've been. <<
Our players, our friends and our bank managers?
>>Big, fat dinosaurs ruled the Earth once, undisputed, and they got wiped
out. Overnight.<<
Most dinosaurs weren't actually fat, you know.
>> Only the species that were flexible enough to adapt to
the new conditions survived.<<
You've been back then so you know exactly what happened? Cool. A Time Lord...
right here with us!
>> Well, guess what buddy-boy? The Internet
has brought with it an entirely new set of conditions.<<
Yawn. ''Buddy boy''? Why are you talking like a bad guy from an action movie?
>> If you want to
survive then you need to be flexible and adapt. <<
And have bionics implanted in our limbs? Don't tell me... you can rebuild us.
You have the technology to make the worlds first bionic PBM firms! Whoo-hoo!
>> That means opening your
mind to new ideas, <<
The wheel? That'll never work!
>>hedging your bets with new approaches, not burning down
bridges *before* you come to them,<<
Keep it up! Keep it up! I only need a few
more cliches for a complete set! Anybody trade me for ''Bird in the hand' ??'
>> and certainly not burning down bridges
just to spite everyone else who thinks differently.<<
Ah. So lets see. Lets assume you are the manufacturer of Pepsi Cola and some
14-year old geek from High School comes along and says he can make a better
cola. He hasn't ever made a drink before. He hasn't tasted cola in six years,
but he knows how to do it because he tasted Fanta and Schnapple once and
hell... they're drinks too! His list of ingredients includes several poisons
and household spiders. How seriously do YOU take him?
Now if the same kid came back when he was thirty with several degrees and a
successful background of drink-manufacture under his belt I'd be inclined to
give him some respect. Until then, claims that you are going to make the
''greatest drink ever'' aren't going to impress anybody very much, now are
they?
If he'd actually aired some of these ideas we would have been pleased to
discuss them and offer advice. Instead he made bland claims with no backup.
Just plain silly.
>>The same applies to a stack of other old-timers in this newsgroup that
have their heads in the sand and arses in the air, just waiting to get
booted.<<
You really are a tough guy, aren't you?
Im impressed anyway. I bet you are one mean mutha.
>> Carol wrote some tripe about PBM not being dead until the Rumours
column of Flagship dries up. What a pathetically narrow, blinkered and
coloured view. "The industry's not dead until our little magazine says it
is." God, how arrogant!<<
What's little about the longest-standing and most well-known specialist
magazine in the PBM hobby?
>>Do you people ever listen to yourselves?<<
Do YOU? New ideas and new faces are fine. I remember when I was one too. A
complete lack of respect for the hobby and its leading figures is pretty
pathetic though. Since your message was obviously designed to irritate, I have
answered in kind. I don't expect you to actually listen, your voice being too
loud to hear anybody else talking, I suspect.
>></FLAME><<
If you say so, Henry.
Steve Tierney
-Madhouse UK
Evilb
sum up the attitude of the pbm world.
I admit that I've been out of the scene for a while, but my enthusiam
and ideas haven't stopped, and now I have the skills to put it into
practise.
In the old days, the pbm industry (in the UK) seemed to be controlled
by a few select individuals who frankly enjoyed their status.
I get the feeling things haven't changed much.
Well, here's one in the eye from a not so young upstart.
Evilb
Why do you all insist on fighting. Very amusing reading btw.
Some particular notes of interest.
I'm afraid from my viewpoint, the web has long been my main resource
for pbm/pbem, and as its here that my attentions will lie, still fail
to see the big deal here.
Also, so what if ppl decide to be anon in their postings ?
"You talk real big from an anonymous address in an anonymous place."
What are you going to do, fly over and beat the guy up ?
clink, clink.
Sam Palmer
>On the commercial->free part, who needs a test? You can see a parallel in
>the way the ISP market is here - we have many, many free ISPs now, and yet
>there are still many people using the commercial ones instead of switching.
>
Demon- web-space, up to 3 e-mail box, an e-mail interface,enabling me to
read my news and mail off-line. All £11 a mouth.
Freeserve- No web-space, one e-mail box, no internet interface, forcing
the user to read his mail and news on-line.
And yeah I see you point about the different GMs on each side.
Commerical GM I think do a better job becasue that it, it is a job. But
hobby GM take there hobby or leave there hobby to suit them. I mean I
have lost count of the number of posts which still need to be turned
around in my mail box.
--
Sam Palmer
Evilb
Without being rude, this is EXACTLY the sort of thing that needs to be
overcome.
Lets take Free ISP's. Just to set the record straight. ANY ISP that
gives access to a news server will allow you to read articles off
line. Its the software that is dependant.
Look at companies like freeUK. Unlimited email addresses, web space,
news server, excellent service.
The fact is not that the free guys can't do as good a job, its simply
that most ppl don't have the technical knowledge of how to set up the
software themselves.
You can also draw some other parallels between free and paying ISP's
and PBM's. Many people are simply reluctant to change, you are never
going to stop that. Mostly though, its a perceived difference and not
a real one. There are other issues like changing your email address,
or in the case of a pbm, getting that character known all over again
(as an example).
It is also amazing that from one, off the cuff remark, that was never
meant to be taken seriously, all hell breaks loose in here.
I'm just glad that I've managed to blow off the cobwebs and get some
more life in here.
If that is all I do, it will be worth it.
Greg Lindahl
> >Sounds like it's time for a blind test...
>
> In what way, exactly? I'm not talking about the quality of the games, just to
> make that clear. They may be, and probably some are, great. It's more the GM
> angle I was thinking of.
You seem to think you can tell the difference between commercial and
free games. The purpose of the blind test is to show you that you
can't always do that.
> On the commercial->free part, who needs a test? You can see a parallel in
> the way the ISP market is here - we have many, many free ISPs now, and yet
> there are still many people using the commercial ones instead of switching.
Where's the parallel? You pay for the "free" ISP through your
telephone connect charges. No money flows to the GM of a free game.
-- g
Greg Lindahl
> Hey Greg - do you have to go to classes to learn how to be this abrasive, or
> is it just something that comes *naturally* to you?
I've been taking lessons from Carol -- haven't you been paying attention?
-- g
Paul Walker
>>>Or increases his credibility, because he's not anal-retentive like
>>>some of the people who've been whining about pseudonyms ever since
>>>BBSes were created.
>>Hey Greg - do you have to go to classes to learn how to be this abrasive, or
>>is it just something that comes *naturally* to you?
>The very same could be said of you sir.
As far as I'm aware, I don't come across like I'm attempting to pick a fight
every time I post. Greg does, and it's been remarked on many times in the
past.
>And anyway, whats in a name ?
Nothing, in most cases. Having a 'real' name attached to the posts tends to
inspire more confidence in the poster, though, and most people who run games
like people to have confidence in them. ;-)
Paul Walker
>> Hey Greg - do you have to go to classes to learn how to be this abrasive, or
>> is it just something that comes *naturally* to you?
>I've been taking lessons from Carol -- haven't you been paying attention?
The student has surpassed the teacher, it would appear.
Carol Mulholland
> Carol wrote some tripe about PBM not being dead until the Rumours
> column of Flagship dries up. What a pathetically narrow, blinkered
and coloured view. "The industry's not dead until our little magazine
says it is." God, how arrogant!
>
Gosh no, Henry, our Rumours section consists of players'
uncensored comments about the games they're playing.
It's therefore reasonable to say that when we stop getting
comments for Rumours, there won't be many keen PBMers left.
Good news there are Rumours comments on 40 games in the
forthcoming issue.
Carol
Steve Pritchard
Evilb wrote in message <37d6530b...@news.dial.pipex.com>...
>Why do you insist on continuing with this theme ?
>I used to read flagship, but no longer do. Is this some sort of crime
>?
Continuing? I've made perhaps one post to this thread so far. Perhaps
you've mistaken me for someone who really cares all that much?
>I've played enough games to know that there is a yawning divide
>between what can be achieved, and what is currently out there.
>
>My interests lie predominantly with electronic media and the internet,
>and it is here that I am focusing my attention.
>
>Whether you think anything I produce in the future is good or bad
>doesn't really matter. I know I will try my best, and thats all that
>counts.
>
>You never know, you may be licensing my stuff in the future... :)
I wish you the best in your endeavours. I'd never do otherwise to anyone.
I just think that there might be a little more to it than you are
expecting.
Greg Lindahl
> Gosh no, Henry, our Rumours section consists of players'
> uncensored comments about the games they're playing.
>
> It's therefore reasonable to say that when we stop getting
> comments for Rumours, there won't be many keen PBMers left.
Or maybe that means you don't have any readers left. I haven't read
any PBM paper publication in over a decade, yet I've been playing
commercial games pretty much continuously.
-- g
Ken Mulholland
> coloured view. "The industry's not dead until our little magazine says it
> is." God, how arrogant!
>
'little' that tells us all something about PBM.
Ken Mulholland
When we switch on our computers on 1st January and they do not work very
well - it will be just like any other day.
Ken Mulholland
> Or maybe that means you don't have any readers left. I haven't read
> any PBM paper publication in over a decade, yet I've been playing
> commercial games pretty much continuously.
>
free sample copy of our high quality magazine. We could not afford to
produce at regular intervals a magazine of this quality unless we had
plenty of subscribers.
Ken.
Telling the truth gets you into just as much
trouble as telling lies - only it's quicker.
Steve Pritchard
Henry Penninkilampi wrote in message ...
>In article <936792260.15954.0...@news.demon.co.uk>, "Steve
>Pritchard" <st...@spelbind.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> So you are going to write a world beating PBM, you are UK based, and
you
>> didn't even now the address of Flagship?
>>
>> What in that statement suggests that you haven't really done at all
that
>> much research into your new venture?
>
><FLAME>
>
>
they
>*are* subscribers, all they care about is the quality of the magazine
and
>the regularity with which issues reach their doorstep. Knowing (or not
>knowing) the address of Flagship means absolutely nothing.
The gentleman in question said he hadn't read Flagship in about six years
or so. He has a negligible knowledge of the PBM scene in the UK and yet,
despite this fact, he is going to write a game that will blow us all out
of the water.
Tell you what, I'm going to build a new type Battleship of the Navy. I
know nothing about engineering, ship construction or even the Navy, but
I'm going to do it; what do you think my chances of success are?
>If you've got nothing better to do that sit one UseNet all day and
>nit-pick, then you really need to go out and get a life. Take up
>worm-farming or something.
This is cobblers, Henry. How many posts have I made to rec.games.pbm in
the last month? Twelve? Fifteen? I post infrewuently whatever the case
and even I was the worlds slowest typer, I think I could manage a fwe
more than that if all I did was "sit one UseNet all day and nit-pick". As
for getting a life, do you know how poor that sounds. For someone writing
an alleged flame, you are pretty crap at it, don't you think?
>The last thing that someone in *your* position should be doing is
pissing
>in the pocket of every person who is enthusiastic about a new idea, has
a
>different viewpoint, or somehow challenges the status quo. If you want
>your darling industry to survive then you need to start encouraging new
>blood to have a go. Hell, you might even want to consider getting off
>your arse and *helping* them, rather than revelling in complacency like
a
>pig in swill.
I'm not going to encourage anyone to run headlong into something without
thinking it through first. If anyone in "my darling industry" actually
needs help I will give it freely and happily. PBM can be fun to run, but
it can also be dreadfully dull and unrewarding. People seriously thinking
of getting into the industry need to realise that. Taking up such an
ambitious plan without having any idea of your potential market is
tantamount to suicide.
>Who cares how long you've been doing this, or how sucessful you've been.
>Big, fat dinosaurs ruled the Earth once, undisputed, and they got wiped
>out. Overnight. Only the species that were flexible enough to adapt to
>the new conditions survived. Well, guess what buddy-boy? The Internet
>has brought with it an entirely new set of conditions. If you want to
>survive then you need to be flexible and adapt. That means opening your
>mind to new ideas, hedging your bets with new approaches, not burning
down
>bridges *before* you come to them, and certainly not burning down
bridges
>just to spite everyone else who thinks differently.
I said, quite simply, that in X many years of trading I've heard the "I'm
going to write the best game in the world" too often to count. It rarely
happens. The people who do well in this industry rarely make bold claims
that cannot achieve. Experience tells me that, not anything to do with
dinosaurs, the Internet or whatever else you wish to put up as a supposed
argument.
>The same applies to a stack of other old-timers in this newsgroup that
>have their heads in the sand and arses in the air, just waiting to get
>booted. Carol wrote some tripe about PBM not being dead until the
Rumours
>column of Flagship dries up. What a pathetically narrow, blinkered and
>coloured view. "The industry's not dead until our little magazine says
it
>is." God, how arrogant!
>
>Do you people ever listen to yourselves?
Let's see; Carol, Steve and myself all make a living from PBM. Every week
someone turns up and tell us our industry is dead. We, who probably have
a better idea about this than others, say it is not. If Carol and Steve
tell me the industry is dying then I might well listen to them - I won't
listen to some sad Internet Geek who just believes things are going that
way.
On the newsgroup I frequent more than any other, misc.writing, someone
comes along every month to tell us that books are dead and electronic
publishing is the only way to go. I own thousands of books and none of
them are in electronic format, with the exception of the ones I have
written myself.
></FLAME>
No it wasn't; it was a sad little diatribe by someone who has little
grasp of facts and too much time on his hands.
gra...@deletethisaffordable-leather.co.uk
On 7 Sep 1999 20:43:34 GMT, pa...@nospam.demon.co.uk (Paul Walker)
wrote:
>On the commercial->free part, who needs a test? You can see a parallel in
>the way the ISP market is here - we have many, many free ISPs now, and yet
>there are still many people using the commercial ones instead of switching.
Sorry, but this is more due to inertia/ idleness, a fact which banks,
credit card companies and mortgage lenders rely on when they offer
cheap opening rates on loans and then withdraw them. It is amazing how
many people don't bother to switch to a better rate.
Apparantly people are more likely to change their partner than their
bank!!!
(Also "free" ISPs tend to be bloody expensive if you need technical
support!)
Cheers,
Graham.
gra...@deletethisaffordable-leather.co.uk
On Wed, 8 Sep 1999 15:34:03 +0100, Sam Palmer
<S...@Bitton.homeway.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Free ISP don't offer the same service as the ISP you pay for.
>
>Demon- web-space, up to 3 e-mail box, an e-mail interface,enabling me to
>read my news and mail off-line. All £11 a mouth.
>
>Freeserve- No web-space, one e-mail box, no internet interface, forcing
>the user to read his mail and news on-line.
Virgin: 10MB webspace, software and I think they're going to be doing
multiple e-mail addresses soon.
They do have one good feature, you can swap between the free and pay
services at any time, so, if you need tech support that is likely to
take more than about seven minutes (at £1 a minute rates) you can
switch to the £6.99 a month pay service until the end of that month
and get unlimited tech support until you sort it out!
Cheers,.
Graham.
Rob Harper
news:7r5u09$k...@news2.newsguy.com...
> You seem to think you can tell the difference between commercial and
> free games. The purpose of the blind test is to show you that you
> can't always do that.
Uhh? Looks like there's a lot of talking at cross-purposes going on here.
While there may be no real difference between commercial and non-commercial
games -- and I've seen plenty of *really* good freebies over the years --
some people are willing, and would even /prefer/ to pay good money to play a
game. Why? Because the fact that they are supporting the GM financially
makes it much less likely that the GM will pack up and do something else the
moment he gets bored with the game.
Before you flame me, I'm not saying that non-commercial GMs are all
fly-by-nighters (look at Roy for one example of a hobbyist with great
longevity), just that payment *can* make a game more stable in the long
term.
Is that what you meant, Paul?
--
Rob.
-------------------------------------------
State of Mind [Games by post and die rolls by proxy.]
Website: www.homestead.com/stateofmind
E-mail: state...@breathemail.net
Our motto: "Hit it harder."
Paul Walker
>> In what way, exactly? I'm not talking about the quality of the games, just to
>> make that clear. They may be, and probably some are, great. It's more the GM
>> angle I was thinking of.
>You seem to think you can tell the difference between commercial and
>free games. The purpose of the blind test is to show you that you
>can't always do that.
Until you actually start reading what I write, rather than what you *think*
I wrote, this is a pointless thread.
>> On the commercial->free part, who needs a test? You can see a parallel in
>> the way the ISP market is here - we have many, many free ISPs now, and yet
>> there are still many people using the commercial ones instead of switching.
>Where's the parallel? You pay for the "free" ISP through your
>telephone connect charges. No money flows to the GM of a free game.
There are no charges to the user of the ISP, or the player of the free game.
The sole difference is that the free ISP has /some/ incentive to keep going
(money), compared to the GM of a free game who just has satisfaction.
Paul Walker
>Freeserve- No web-space, one e-mail box, no internet interface, forcing
>the user to read his mail and news on-line.
Off-topic, so the last post I'll make on this point (take to email if you
want), but you've managed a quite impressive zero accuracy score on that
sentence above. ;-)
>And yeah I see you point about the different GMs on each side.
>Commerical GM I think do a better job becasue that it, it is a job. But
>hobby GM take there hobby or leave there hobby to suit them. I mean I
>have lost count of the number of posts which still need to be turned
>around in my mail box.
Exactly. That's one of the reasons I, personally, prefer to play with
commercial ones. :-)
Greg seems to feel that this is some reflection on the game quality, though
(and will no doubt pull out Olympia at some point, as he always does).
BK
>Apparently, many of the finest lines from the bit that was cut
>weren't lost but got re-used in other plays: Lady Capulet's
>complaint on dropping her pizza was given to Lady Macbeth in
>the sleep-walking scene, 'The gondola she sat in, like a
>burnished throne' scans better but loses something of its
>romance when re-applied to Cleopatra, and clearly Hamlet is
>soliloquising over a cup of cappuchino: 'O that this too too
>solid froth would melt...' All proof, if proof were needed...
>
>Carol
Carol get's my vote.
LOL
BK
Tim Lomas
>Demon- web-space, up to 3 e-mail box, an e-mail interface,enabling me to
>read my news and mail off-line. All œ11 a mouth.
Almost right, UNLIMITED email addresses, I've got a dozxen running.
Tim
Henry Penninkilampi
(Evilb) wrote:
> Also, so what if ppl decide to be anon in their postings ?
>
> "You talk real big from an anonymous address in an anonymous place."
>
> What are you going to do, fly over and beat the guy up ?
>
> clink, clink.
What's even more amusing is that the email address is a perfectly valid
one. You'd be surprised how *little* SPAM you get if you used a *valid*
email address which has 'spam' as part of it. ;) All the SPAMmer's
scripts that gather email addresses from UseNet postings assume that your
address is invalid and discard it. Heh, heh, heh...
Of course, one would actually need to have a flexible and adaptive
approach to the use of email addresses in order to think of something like
that, which is probably why Steve didn't work it out.
I'm wondering what 'anonymous place' I reside in, though... Metropolitan
Internet Services exists, the .net.au domain space exists, and Australia
also exists. Hmmm... Ah, well - I think Steve must have experienced a
segmentation fault on his version of reality and core dumped.
...
[steve@madhouse /dev/null]# tail -3 /var/log/messages
...
Sep 9 00:37:49 steve logic[704]: segmentation violation (1182665)
Sep 9 00:37:50 steve kernel: core dumped in /tmp/
Sep 9 00:37:53 steve kernel: respawning /root/reality/logic/1989.bak
...
He did say one thing, though:
>Lets assume you are the manufacturer of Pepsi Cola and some 14-year old
>geek from High School comes along and says he can make a better cola.
>He hasn't ever made a drink before. He hasn't tasted cola in six years,
>but he knows how to do it because he tasted Fanta and Schnapple once and
>hell... they're drinks too! His list of ingredients includes several
>poisons and household spiders. How seriously do YOU take him?
>
>Now if the same kid came back when he was thirty with several degrees
>and a successful background of drink-manufacture under his belt I'd be
>inclined to give him some respect. Until then, claims that you are
>going to make the ''greatest drink ever'' aren't going to impress
>anybody very much, now are they?
Steve obviously hasn't paid much attention to history, where the movers
and shakers of the world have all been drop-outs from conventional
education systems and flew by the seat of their pants.
Example #1: Bill Gates. Dropped out of Harvard in 1975 to found
Microsoft because he got sick of being spoon-fed the same-old-same-old by
the establishment. Now worth how many hundred billion?
And just to even things up, Example #2: Steve Jobs' job pitch to John
Sculley (then the #2 man at PepsiCo) to join Apple: "Do you want to spend
the rest of your life selling sugared water, or do you want a chance to
change the world?"
It's real simple: If you want to create something *special*, then the
only thing you need to do is STOP listening to conventional wisdom. STOP
listening to the veterans of this newsgroup. All they are going to tell
you is what you *can't* do.
Sure, the chances are that you'll fail. Sure, your grand vision may never
be realised. But at least you gave it a go, damnit! At least you tried!
And who knows? There is a non-zero chance that you'll succeed - and if
you do, then every smug, arrogant pratt that has ever doubted you and
tried to hold you back can, well, they can just kiss your arse! Because
*you'll* be the man! Don't do it because you can. Don't do it because
you want to. Do it because they said it couldn't be done.
To the victor, the spoils!
Henry.
Henry Penninkilampi
> > Hey Greg - do you have to go to classes to learn how to be this abrasive, or
> > is it just something that comes *naturally* to you?
>
> I've been taking lessons from Carol -- haven't you been paying attention?
"Always two there are - a master and an apprentice." -- Yoda.
;^)
Henry.
Paul Walker
>Before you flame me, I'm not saying that non-commercial GMs are all
>fly-by-nighters (look at Roy for one example of a hobbyist with great
>longevity), just that payment *can* make a game more stable in the long
>term. Is that what you meant, Paul?
That's exactly what I meant, or at least a major part of it. At least
*someone* could work out what I was saying. :-)
Carol Mulholland
> But due to censorship at that time, this aspect of the play had to
be removed. Plus the fact that there would have been an extra 134
pages of dialogue, given the fact that Shakesperean plays are fairly
long as it is and the untimely demise of the author, it was therefore
never put back in.
>
Worry not, Mark, I can report the latest scholarship on this, and
it's all good news!
Evilb
gaming prowess, and its interesting that we seem to have two sides,
the free thinkers and the establishment.
Just to set the record straight, lets say it one more time.
Firstly, the initial comment about blowing other games out of the
water was said, tongue in cheek. This is not to say that I do intend
to write a game engine with considerably more scope and depth than
anything I've seen so far.
Secondly, whether it actually becomes a commercial success is not the
primary concern. I'm looking to create as good a game as I possibly
can.
Thirdly, without actual knowledge of my skills and abilities, I would
respectfully ask that you do not make such negative assumptions.
Open your minds, think of what could be, then go for it.
Shoot for the stars. You may land on the moon, but hey, I'm on the
moon!
Carol Mulholland
> At least *someone* could work out what I was saying. :-)
You were making a good point, and clearly. Not to worry,
misunderstanding is the usual stuff of communication here.
Maybe it's worth noting that the earlier 'discount' topic raised
by Colin Forbes also indicates that some players like to feel
that their fellow-players have made a financial commitment to a
game?
Carol
MadCentral
What are you going to do, fly over and beat the guy up ?<<
My point was that even though it is common practice to shout your mouth off in
a rude fashion over the internet, I personally feel its pretty cowardly. I
don't think people should say anything from an anonymous address on the other
side of the world that they wouldn't say to my face. Of course, if being a
spineless nerd turns you on then they should proceed for as long as they want.
Fly over & beat him up? Why would I bother? But were he to speak to rudely to
me in person I don't doubt I'd show him how I felt about it. Of course, he
wouldn't. He'd hide behind a pot plant of something.
Steve
MadCentral
approach to the use of email addresses in order to think of something like
that, which is probably why Steve didn't work it out.<<
You know something Henry!
You're right! That IS what happened.
Damn. I've got to try and be more
flexible and adaptive, and all those
other buzz words, just like you! Oh how lucky you are to be so very cool!
>>I'm wondering what 'anonymous place' I reside in, though... Metropolitan
Internet Services exists, the .net.au domain space exists, and Australia
also exists. Hmmm... Ah, well - I think Steve must have experienced a
segmentation fault on his version of reality and core dumped.<<
So. Bored now of talking like a bad action movie, Henry takes a step into Star
Trek and tries on his replica Federation uniform for size! Jeez.
Steve
MadCentral
What a total asswipe you are, Lindahl.
Carol, as everybody knows, is the nicest and most reasonable person here. You,
on the other hand, are the biggest dick of the lot.
Steve
MadCentral
gaming prowess,<<
None of us ever did any such thing. We simply berated you for making silly
claims. We never said you *couldnt* do it. We just said you were silly to be
so blase about it.
>> and its interesting that we seem to have two sides,
the free thinkers and the establishment.<<
The wannabees and the already-done-its?
>>Just to set the record straight, lets say it one more time.<<
Yawn.
>>Firstly, the initial comment about blowing other games out of the
water was said, tongue in cheek.<<
Well if you'd said that sixty messages ago we'd all have had a laugh and
forgotten it.
>> This is not to say that I do intend
to write a game engine with considerably more scope and depth than
anything I've seen so far.<<
Good for you. Nothing wrong with ambition.
>>Secondly, whether it actually becomes a commercial success is not the
primary concern. I'm looking to create as good a game as I possibly
can.<<
Good for you again.
>>Thirdly, without actual knowledge of my skills and abilities, I would
respectfully ask that you do not make such negative assumptions.<<
We never did. I would respectfully ask that without ever having actually seen
or played our games you not *assume* you can do better.
>>Open your minds, think of what could be, then go for it.<<
Open your eyes and see what already *is* and then go for it.
>>Shoot for the stars. You may land on the moon, but hey, I'm on the
moon!<<
Or you may land in a peat bog. but hey! You're in a peat bog!
Steve
-Madhouse UK
Evilb
Greg Lindahl
> Before you flame me, I'm not saying that non-commercial GMs are all
> fly-by-nighters
Why would I flame you? Thanks for taking the time to say something
clearly without insulting a huge group of GMs. That's unusual.
BTW, there are people on this newsgroup who claim they can tell the
difference between email and non-email games, or free and pay games.
> just that payment *can* make a game more stable in the long
> term.
I've had plenty of gaming companies provide counter-examples, but
you're welcome to your opinion about the averages.
-- g
Greg Lindahl
> >Where's the parallel? You pay for the "free" ISP through your
> >telephone connect charges. No money flows to the GM of a free game.
>
> There are no charges to the user of the ISP, or the player of the free game.
> The sole difference is that the free ISP has /some/ incentive to keep going
> (money), compared to the GM of a free game who just has satisfaction.
Amazing. So you're going to compare two completely different
situations as similar, right after you accused me of not reading
carefully!
The user of the "free" ISP is charged by the phone company, which
kicks back money to the ISP. I realize you live in the UK and I don't,
but you really ought to read your phone bill more carefully. Heck, I
used to work for the 1st free US ISP (juno.com)... but it's not
organized the same way as the ones in Europe.
-- g
Greg Lindahl
> Our 'little magazine' is the biggest magazine in PBM - if it really is
> 'little' that tells us all something about PBM.
OK, tell me if it's little: I think the PBM market includes things
like VGA Planets and the Sports Illustrated fantasy sports leagues.
So, given these 100,000+ players, what percentage subscribe to your
magazine?
Even if you take your definition of the PBM market, whatever it is,
what percentage subscribe to your magazine?
-- g
Evilb
>Yawn.
>
Such patience
>We never did. I would respectfully ask that without ever having actually seen
>or played our games you not *assume* you can do better.
>
Such complacency
>
>Open your eyes and see what already *is* and then go for it.
>
Oh, I'm looking alright.
>Or you may land in a peat bog. but hey! You're in a peat bog!
Such encouragement.
Long live open mindedness.
Carol Mulholland
Ooh, blush, that's really kind of you, Steve. But I think maybe
you're being a teensy weensy bit unfair to Greg - I'd read his
message as a grateful acknowledgement that he can now distinguish
between a noun and an adjective.
Oh dear, I do hope so - Carol
Steve Pritchard
Evilb wrote in message <37d7cfa6...@news.dial.pipex.com>...
>And you wonder why PBM isn't more popular ?
WTF has this got to do with anything?
Presumably you mean that because people have defended their own points of
view, that they are somehow ruining the hobby?
You mentioned landing on the moon earlier - I reckon you'd be better off
going back to Mars.
Greg Lindahl
> I'd read his
> message as a grateful acknowledgement that he can now distinguish
> between a noun and an adjective.
Reading is fundamental. And no, that's not what I was saying.
-- g
Greg Lindahl
> And you wonder why PBM isn't more popular ?
PBM's popularity -- or lack thereof -- has nothing to do with
flamewars on this newsgroup. It has to do with good games, and
innovative products like VGA Planets, which combines PBM with PC
gaming.
If you're looking for approval for your innovative idea, you're
looking in the wrong place. Write your game and prove it in the
marketplace.
-- greg
Karen J. Cravens
GL>BTW, there are people on this newsgroup who claim they can tell the
GL>difference between email and non-email games, or free and pay games.
Um... on the first one, wouldn't that be kind of easy? Isn't the piece of
paper in the mailbox a strong clue?
I should read this thread closer, I guess.
--
Karen J. Cravens sil...@phoenyx.net
The Dog Ate My Sketchbook: http://silver.phoenyx.net/
Roy/Day One
news:37d6...@news1.vip.uk.com...
> Before you flame me, I'm not saying that non-commercial GMs are all
> term.
Sum-one pash me me teef before I dribble in me cocoa... I'm not even 30
yet!! Aaaaagh!
Phil Shulkind
>
>It's therefore reasonable to say that when we stop getting
>comments for Rumours, there won't be many keen PBMers left.
>
>Good news there are Rumours comments on 40 games in the
>forthcoming issue.
Delurks again, eek! Just pulled out issue 66 of Flagship as a random
sample (Mar/Apr 97) which had comments on 68 games. I might be wrong,
but I have the distinct impression that over the years Rumours has
shrunk in size, which *maybe* reflects a parallel reduction in the
number of players and / or a reduction in the readership of Flagship.
Don't suppose anyone feels inclined to analyse Rumours from the time the
zine went bi-monthly? No, didn't think so! Maybe Flagship would be
willing to reveal circulation figures over a period of a few years to
provide evidence of growth in the hobby, but again probably not!!
Phil Shulkind
Ken Mulholland
> OK, tell me if it's little: I think the PBM market includes things
> like VGA Planets and the Sports Illustrated fantasy sports leagues.
> So, given these 100,000+ players, what percentage subscribe to your
> magazine?
>
player bases! However your point is irrelevant. I said that Flagship is
the biggest PBM Mag around - tell me that that is incorrect...
By the way we would like to meet you in a pub if you are ever in Exeter
- Don't worry, pubs in England allow people under 18 if they drink pop.
Regards Ken.
P.S. Still waiting for your snail so we can send you some copies of
Flagship - then you could argue from knowledge rather than ignorance.
Telling the truth gets you into just as much
trouble as telling lies - only it's quicker.
Ken Mulholland
> Don't suppose anyone feels inclined to analyse Rumours from the time the
> zine went bi-monthly? No, didn't think so! Maybe Flagship would be
> willing to reveal circulation figures over a period of a few years to
> provide evidence of growth in the hobby, but again probably not!!
>
outstanding money you owe us.
Regards Ken.
Phil Shulkind
>Ha! We all know that VGA and footy PBMs lie like troopers about their
>player bases!
And how exactly do you know that???
Phil Shulkind
Phil Shulkind
>outstanding money you owe us.
>
more than once. I have other debts from my days in PBM to clear before
you get a look in, sorry.
So you would deprive the rest of the readers of some useful information
for the sake of the hundred and a bit pounds that Phildee owe to
Flagship. I wonder how that will sit with the rest of the readers of
this newsgroup? What next - I won't publish Flagship cos Phildee haven't
paid me yet??
Not very edifying to see such a "key man" in the hobby make such a
feeble excuse for not revealing pertinent facts that would be of much
interest to all. Would have thought better of you Ken.
Phil Shulkind
Greg Lindahl
> Um... on the first one, wouldn't that be kind of easy? Isn't the piece of
> paper in the mailbox a strong clue?
>
> I should read this thread closer, I guess.
Reading this thread won't help you, but the thread I was referring to
involved a poster who claimed more differences than just the piece of
paper in the mailbox. Given the large number of games which run via
email or postal mail, it seemed a bit weird to me at the time, but
hey...
-- g
Sam Palmer
>What a total asswipe you are, Lindahl.
>Carol, as everybody knows, is the nicest and most reasonable person here. You,
>on the other hand, are the biggest dick of the lot.
I back you up with that, even since I have joined this new group. Carol
has had nothing but grief from Greg.
If we had a vote for the face of PBM and PBeM then Carol would win,
followed by Steve...Even Evilb would get a look in. But Grey, as they
say in the USA "Yeah Right."
Just had to get that off my chest.
--
Sam Palmer
Carol Mulholland
> Just pulled out issue 66 of Flagship as a random
> sample (Mar/Apr 97) which had comments on 68 games
Readers have been on their summer hols. I reckon 40 is pretty
good for the time of year and still a sizeable number.
By the way, are you still running Phoenix Rising and IIF or
should I drop either/both from our lists? - Carol
Rob Harper
news:936898626.4745.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> Sum-one pash me me teef before I dribble in me cocoa... I'm not even 30
> yet!! Aaaaagh!
Me neither, but it's getting oh so close, and my eyes aren't what they used
to be...
--
Rob.
-------------------------------------------
State of Mind [Games by post and die rolls by proxy.]
Website: www.homestead.com/stateofmind
E-mail: state...@breathemail.net
Our motto: "Hit it harder."
Rob Harper
that I'm an anorak, if nothing else. I'll just do a stat thing for every 5
issues, starting at... Let's say, issue 40. The list below covers the
number of games covered in rumours and the number of contributors to the
column that issue. For interest, I will also add the number of games listed
in Galactic View (the game listings section).
Issue Games Contributors GV total
40 94 ? 250 (Nov
92)
45 85 38 282 (Sep
93)
50 99 47 299 (Jul
94)
55 86 59 238 (May
95)
60 99 60 255 (Mar
96)
65 70 35 247 (Jan
97)
70 36 11 240 (Nov
97)
75 43 22 248 (Sep
98)
80 41 21 253 (Jul
99)
Hmm... Statistically meaningless, but I think it does show that Flagship's
Rumours column ain't what it used to be. Issue 70 was around the time of
the big "Will Flagship See Another Dawn?" phase, which, happily, it
survived.
The mag is certainly past its heyday, but it has kept going and I still
reckon it's the best overall barometer of the UK PBM market.
Phil Shulkind
>
>Readers have been on their summer hols. I reckon 40 is pretty
>good for the time of year and still a sizeable number.
>
>By the way, are you still running Phoenix Rising and IIF or
>should I drop either/both from our lists? - Carol
>
Yes, still running it on an amateur basis, you can keep IIF in too,
thanks.
Phil Shulkind
Paul Walker
>The user of the "free" ISP is charged by the phone company, which
Users of *all* ISPs are charged by the phone company.
--
Paul
To email me, change nospam to black-sun.
Phil Shulkind
>Okay, here's a bit of Flagship Rumours analysis to show... Well, it'll show
>that I'm an anorak, if nothing else.
Thanks for that Rob!
Phil Shulkind
Greg Lindahl
> Ha! We all know that VGA and footy PBMs lie like troopers about their
> player bases! However your point is irrelevant. I said that Flagship is
> the biggest PBM Mag around - tell me that that is incorrect...
You said other things, too, which I disputed. But if you want to
change the subject, by all means do so.
> By the way we would like to meet you in a pub if you are ever in Exeter
> - Don't worry, pubs in England allow people under 18 if they drink pop.
I'm 34. You can stop the snide comments and insults.
> P.S. Still waiting for your snail so we can send you some copies of
> Flagship - then you could argue from knowledge rather than ignorance.
My address is on my homepage; help yourself. I have seen copies of
Flagship; I said I hadn't read one _recently_.
-- g
Greg Lindahl
> Ken Mulholland <K...@timepatternspbm.demon.co.uk> writes...
> >Ha! We all know that VGA and footy PBMs lie like troopers about their
> >player bases!
>
What I know is that Yahoo is now offering play-by-web fantasy sports
leagues for free. Death of PBM predicted, film at 11.
-- g
Phil Shulkind
>
>What I know is that Yahoo is now offering play-by-web fantasy sports
>leagues for free. Death of PBM predicted, film at 11.
There are lots of excellent games for free on Yahoo, but I don't think
that is likely to stop people playing PBM/PBEM if they want to do so.
Phil Shulkind
Karen J. Cravens
GL>Reading this thread won't help you, but the thread I was referring to
GL>involved a poster who claimed more differences than just the piece of
GL>paper in the mailbox. Given the large number of games which run via
GL>email or postal mail, it seemed a bit weird to me at the time, but
GL>hey...
In the aggregate, though, I think there's a difference. In roleplaying,
at least, just the turnaround time difference can make a qualitative,
rather than quantitative, difference in game style.
So there doesn't *have* to be a difference, but in practice there often
is.