Memento
MTPletsch
the movie, Memento. If you haven't seen it, hopefully it's in a cheap theatre
where you live. I just thought this was one of the most amazing, intellectual
movies I've ever seen.
I really thought through this whole movie that it would make such an EXCELLENT
IF game! The main character doesn't have amnesia, but he has no short term
memory, so he has to right everything down because when he wakes up the next
morning, he won't remember a thing from the day before. I was just curious as
to what other people thought about this. The thought of it as an Interactive
Fiction game just sends shivers down my spine. :-)
Graeme
M. D. Krauss
Anyhow, I don't see at all how it would work as IF, unless it was just one day. I mean, the *player* would remember the previous day. We can't make IF that automatically wipes the players memory every now and then...
.. Or can we? <Twilight Zone music>
Of course, for just a one-day plot, it could be good, nicely accounting for the usual problem of being dropped in to a fictional life that the player knows nothing about.
On 28 Jul 2001 05:34:01 GMT
Alex Warren
> That sounds like a really interesting movie.. actually, it sounds familiar...
> Anyhow, I don't see at all how it would work as IF, unless it was just one day.
> I mean, the *player* would remember the previous day. We can't make IF that automatically
> wipes the players memory every now and then...
Spoiler Space follows....
In Memento, the movie takes place backwards - the character doesn't remember
what's happened before, and neither does the audience, as we've not seen it yet.
You could do the same thing in IF I suppose - chop up the plot into scenes
(possibly days) and work backwards. Then as you progress, you pick up objects
you had to use earlier, etc.
The whole thing could be exceptionally confusing.
--
Alex Warren
al...@axeuk.com
Quest - make adventure games easily - http://www.axeuk.com/quest/
jinkies!
> I really thought through this whole movie that it would make such an EXCELLENT
> IF game! The main character doesn't have amnesia, but he has no short term
> memory, so he has to right everything down because when he wakes up the next
> morning, he won't remember a thing from the day before.
I had exactly the same thought when I saw the 1994 film Blank Slate about a
private eye who forgets the previous day every morning. It's not the
greatest film ever but it's a really good IF plot device.
j.
RUYelluh
player to do. It would be more like Photopia, since all this stuff already
happened and the player would have to move along a very fixed storyline.
The more complex the story, the less options for the player.
tna...@direct.ca
> That sounds like a really interesting movie.. actually, it sounds familiar... I think I saw a comedy once with the same idea, something about a private detective maybe...?
>
> Anyhow, I don't see at all how it would work as IF, unless it was just one day. I mean, the *player* would remember the previous day. We can't make IF that automatically wipes the players memory every now and then...
>
> .. Or can we? <Twilight Zone music>
The original author was referring to the way they dealt with it in _Momento_.
In _Momento_, we see the story from the lead character's
perspective--who has no long term memory--by starting at the end of the
story and going backwards. The first scene is the last 5 minutes of the
story. The next scene is what happened just before that, etc. until we
get to the beginning of the story. It was an effective way of
simulating memory loss, but it got pretty tiresome after the first 5
times they did it.
Still, it could be done in IF. I'm sure we'll see an entry in the IF
competition do it. My personal favorite from the last competition is
the homage to "Being John Malkovich" called "Being Andrew Plotkin".
--
----
Travers Naran, F/T Programmer & P/T Meddler in Time & Space
New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada, Earth, Milky Way, etc.
"Stand Back! I'm a programmer!"
Visit the SFTV Science Blunders Hall of Infamy!
<http://www.geocities.com/naran500/>
Jason Etheridge
> That sounds like a really interesting movie.. actually, it sounds familiar...
> I think I saw a comedy once with the same idea, something about a private
> detective maybe...?
Clean Slate. I never did see that.
Personally, I've been wanting to do something like Groundhog's Day.
M. D. Krauss
must, say, pick up objects that you had used the next day. The grammer
gets tricky here, it's like time travel. So in the movie the problem of
audience/player memory is solved by reversing the presentation temporaly,
but IF is, well, interactive. What stops the player from using their
knowlege of the *future* to alter things? As RUYelluh points out, it would
have to be very controlled like Photopia. If you don't pick up the key,
someone else picks it up and hands it to you, and you just aren't allowed
to drop it.
But what about another way? By dividing the story in to day-length
chapters, the author gains a nexus to bring things together (ie. night)
much like used in Anchorhead. If you aren't carrying the key you used on
the next day, you can't complete the current day and get to the prior
day...
This is a really interesting concept actually.. I'm starting to seriously
hope someone does it.
On 28 Jul 2001 13:19:03 GMT
John Menichelli
jinkies!
> M. D. Krauss <MDKr...@home.com> wrote:
>> That sounds like a really interesting movie.. actually, it sounds familiar...
>> I think I saw a comedy once with the same idea, something about a private
>> detective maybe...?
> Clean Slate. I never did see that.
They play it for laughs, IIRC the criminals think he knows too much. He
writes himself notes.
An IF where the player stumbles around their own bedroom wondering what
everything is and who they are and so on and eventually finds a note
saying 'You have no long term memory, you forget everything whenever
you fall asleep at night. This is what you need to know...' is a very
nice plot device that justifies why the player knows nothing of the
game world.
> Personally, I've been wanting to do something like Groundhog's Day.
That's the sort of game where you can justify running the player through
the day without prompt the first time around so they know who everyone is
and how the day went and what was done.
There was another film, um, 12:01? That did the Groundhog Day concept as
a thriller where the protagonist is trying to stop the disaster that
caused the time loop. Hmm I just checked IMDB and 12:01 was made for TV
but there was actually a film called 12:01 PM in which the protagonist
is stuck in the same 59 minutes of time. Now /that's/ a nice idea, have
the game reset every 118 turns (is two turns per minute reasonable?) and
either do the Groundhog Day approach; keep it repeating until they score
every available point in the game from every good deed and task possible
or do the 12:01 approach; keep it repeating until the game event that
causes the loop to happen is stopped.
This sort of plot device can justify why NPCs tend to be repetative, they
could have busy lives and only interact with the game world for short
periods of each loop.
j.
Adam Cadre
> This is a really interesting concept actually.. I'm starting to
> seriously hope someone does it.
This was, in fact, with a small twist, going to be the idea behind the
game I had targeted for release in the second half of this year.
Then people gave away the gimmick, so I deleted it.
-----
Adam Cadre, Brooklyn, NY
web site: http://adamcadre.ac
novel: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195584/adamcadreac
Sean T Barrett
>This was, in fact, with a small twist, going to be the idea behind the
>game I had targeted for release in the second half of this year.
>
>Then people gave away the gimmick, so I deleted it.
Why does revealing the gimmick spoil it? Either the gimmick shows
up right away in the game, so there's nothing to spoil, or the
gimmick is operating behind the scenes, and most people won't realize
it's a game using the gimmick being discussed until it's over.
If you're worried about being perceived as unoriginal, then just
include a note in it "I started working on this before the discussion
on r.a.i-f".
I'm not sure why it bothers you more to have your thunder stolen
by people on r.a.i-f (especially since, presumably, not all players
read r.a.i-f, I mean, I assume we use separate newsgroups because
there really are a significant number of r.g.if-only people) then
it does to have your thunder stolen by Momento or Groundhog Day.
Or worse yet, if you actually ARE being derivative of them, that
would seem the bigger deal to me.
Most of us authors are smart enough to realize that ideas are cheap
and execution is everything. Executate a Momento-esque game well
and everybody will know that the execution was Cadre all the way.
SeanB
L. Ross Raszewski
This has been discussed before. There are some authors who believe
that the chief enjoyment from a game comes from the unexpectedness of
its "gimmick", and that if players are liable to see it coming, the
game is of no value. It's difficult for many people to understand
exactly why this is, but it seesm to have very little to do with a
fear of beign percieved as "imitative". I don't imagine Adam's
decision to scrap the game was motiviated mostly by "fear" that
people would think he "ripped off" the idea; at this point in his
IF-career, he certainly knows that people have more respect for him
than that. Rather, as I understand it, he believes that the game
simply wouldn't be effective if most people already had an idea of
such a concept.
Logically, if someone, after playing, said "You know, this is
structurally similar to X", that might well be a good thing; we all
know that no work is created in a vacuum, and finding that a particular work
bears comparison to some other can be very enlightening. On the other
hand, if *when you start the game*, you have a sense that the work has
some relation to other-work-X, that sense colors your experience of
the work -- you play it differently, looking for points of continuity
and disparity. Which is something that some authors desparately do not
want.
I, who was tragically conditioned by the public school system to
believe that the experience of readogn a work is enhanced by knowing
as much as is possible about it before you start (hence spending a
week prior to reading anythign to research the author, the major
concepts of the work, reviews and synopses of it,etc), have a hard
time believing that a work is somehow "ruined" if it doesn't come as a
complete surprise, but given how spoiler-cautious this group tends to
be, that such attitudes exist seems totally reasonable (No, I don't
get bothered by spoilers. And please don't, as some have, try to argue
that my experience of a work "really IS TOO" ruined by spoilers, and
that I'm somehow too daft to notice.)
Now, I think it's pretty unfortunate that Adam felt the need to scrap
his game. But I don't think that there's any "blame" owed to people
who've discussed ideas in the context of IF.
Stephen Granade
> MD Krauss wrote:
> > This is a really interesting concept actually.. I'm starting to
> > seriously hope someone does it.
>
> This was, in fact, with a small twist, going to be the idea behind the
> game I had targeted for release in the second half of this year.
>
> Then people gave away the gimmick, so I deleted it.
You've mentioned this before, and I just don't see it.
Ideas fly past on raif at a good clip. You've expressed dismay over
this before, saying that such discussions ruin games before they're
even released. However, there is a big difference between a specific
gimmick being mentioned in context with a specific game and a general
gimmick being mentioned off-hand. The former absolutely will dilute
the impact of a game; the latter is not likely to be remembered in
context of your game unless you entitle it "The Memento Gimmick."
When I start a new game, I don't know anything about it. I have no
idea which of the hundreds of ideas bandied about on raif, if any,
will show up in the game. Such thoughts never even get close to my
mind, let alone cross it.
I *like* the discussion of ideas on raif. Having such discussions as a
counterpoint to coding questions is a Good Thing. If you want to
dislike them, fine, but I'd prefer you not try to stick a big cork in
everyone's mouth by saying, "Your discussion made me delete a game,
neener neener, so you'd better stop talking!"
Stephen
--
Stephen Granade | Interested in adventure games?
sgra...@phy.duke.edu | Visit About Adventure Games
Duke University, Physics Dept | http://adventuregames.about.com
Passenger Pigeon
gri...@cascadia.drizzle.com (Adam Cadre) wrote:
> MD Krauss wrote:
> > This is a really interesting concept actually.. I'm starting to
> > seriously hope someone does it.
>
> This was, in fact, with a small twist, going to be the idea behind the
> game I had targeted for release in the second half of this year.
>
> Then people gave away the gimmick, so I deleted it.
You had this reaction to the movie "Memento," I assume...
because waiting till it was mentioned on raif would be silly. Even
assuming it didn't get discussed here, once the game came out, people
would just say "Hey, this is like that movie," instead of "Hey, this is
like that idea someone on raif mentioned."
--
William Burke, passenge...@hotmail.com. I'm back....
Before you presume my rationality, I'm a Theatre major, Music minor.
I don't represent UCSC; it represents me. Go Slugs!
http://www.passengerpigeon.net (not com, not org)
OKB -- not okblacke
>gri...@cascadia.drizzle.com (Adam Cadre) writes:
>
>> MD Krauss wrote:
>> > This is a really interesting concept actually.. I'm starting to
>> > seriously hope someone does it.
>>
>> This was, in fact, with a small twist, going to be the idea behind the
>> game I had targeted for release in the second half of this year.
>>
>> Then people gave away the gimmick, so I deleted it.
>
>You've mentioned this before, and I just don't see it.
I don't either.
>Ideas fly past on raif at a good clip. You've expressed dismay over
>this before, saying that such discussions ruin games before they're
>even released. However, there is a big difference between a specific
>gimmick being mentioned in context with a specific game and a general
>gimmick being mentioned off-hand. The former absolutely will dilute
>the impact of a game; the latter is not likely to be remembered in
>context of your game unless you entitle it "The Memento Gimmick."
In fact, even if it were remembered, it would probably have little effect
on the playing of the game. If the game's structure is similar to that of
Memento, it will be apparent fairly early in the game (as it was in Memento).
If someone already knows what that structure is, they'll only be "ahead of the
game" up to a point, after which everyone else will also know what the
structure is.
Sure, maybe knowing beforehand would tip players off to pay close
attention to certain things or try certain actions, but they'd already know
that if they'd seen Memento. I am very, very confused as to how mention of the
structure of Memento on this newgroup is any more damaging than such mention
elsewhere (and, at least in my circles, such mention has been common).
>I *like* the discussion of ideas on raif. Having such discussions as a
>counterpoint to coding questions is a Good Thing. If you want to
>dislike them, fine, but I'd prefer you not try to stick a big cork in
>everyone's mouth by saying, "Your discussion made me delete a game,
>neener neener, so you'd better stop talking!"
This I wholeheartedly agree with. What is raif if not a place to discuss
IF? I don't see any reason for discussion to be limited solely to
implementation issues. The possibility that someone might conceivably be
working on implementing some idea discussed here is CERTAINLY not what I'd call
a reason.
And finally, to be frank, it's really extremely likely that, whatever
cool, unique idea someone may have, someone else has thought of it too. Who
knows how many people, on first seeing Memento, thought to themselves, "Hmm, it
would be cool to do IF like that"?
--OKB (Bren...@aol.com) -- no relation to okblacke
"Do not follow where the path may lead;
go, instead, where there is no path, and leave a trail."
--Author Unknown
Adam Cadre
> Why does revealing the gimmick spoil it? Either the gimmick shows
> up right away in the game, so there's nothing to spoil, or the
> gimmick is operating behind the scenes, and most people won't realize
> it's a game using the gimmick being discussed until it's over.
It's not just a one-sentence gimmick, though. When I say "someone gave
away the gimmick," I'm not referring to this conversation here, but one
that happened on ifMUD, in which someone said, "Hmm, what would be the
implications of an IF game running backwards?" and started naming some.
Since examining these implications was the raison d'etre of my piece, by
the time he was done there was really nothing in the work that would've
been new to anyone who'd participated in that conversation. Which was
only a few people, sure. But it's hard to work up the enthusiasm to
straightforwardly implement an idea you've heard come out of someone
else's mouth -- or seen come out of someone else's keyboard, as the case
may be.
> I'm not sure why it bothers you more to have your thunder stolen
> by people on r.a.i-f (especially since, presumably, not all players
> read r.a.i-f, I mean, I assume we use separate newsgroups because
> there really are a significant number of r.g.if-only people) then
> it does to have your thunder stolen by Momento or Groundhog Day.
Memento and Groundhog Day are actual works, though. Someone had an idea
and they put months or years of effort into realizing it and *earned* the
right to stake out a piece of intellectual ground. Which strikes me as
not a bad metaphor: publishing an idea is like claiming a piece of land.
Turning that idea into a *work* is like developing that land, turning into
a garden. If I'm working on an idea and someone releases a game before
I'm done that incorporates the same idea, that's like someone developing
the land I had my eye on; sure, I'd be disappointed, but I'd've been
beaten to the punch fair and square. But simply talking about the idea?
That's like grabbing the land and then tossing a folding chair onto it.
And since the idea was what it'd be like for an *IF game* in specific to
run backwards instead of a linear narrative, only another IF game -- or a
discussion of "What would it be like to do this in IF?" -- can scoop it.
> Most of us authors are smart enough to realize that ideas are cheap
> and execution is everything.
I'm not so sure that's true. I could just as easily say that execution is
cheap -- a good writer can take *anything* and turn it into something
that's at least decent, and it's often a fun project to take a really
dubious starting point and try to salvage it -- but coming up with an idea
worth executing is the hard part.
Andrew Plotkin
>> MD Krauss wrote:
>> > This is a really interesting concept actually.. I'm starting to
>> > seriously hope someone does it.
>>
>> This was, in fact, with a small twist, going to be the idea behind the
>> game I had targeted for release in the second half of this year.
>>
>> Then people gave away the gimmick, so I deleted it.
> You've mentioned this before, and I just don't see it.
Here's my take:
(1) Nobody gave away the gimmick to *your* game; people gave away the
gimmick to someone else's game, which was targetted for release in
the *first* half of the year, thus causing the author to delete it and
clearing the way for your own game.
(2) You could have shelved it for three months until everyone forgot
the offending post.
(3) On 05/23/1997, in a post entitled "Assumptions in most IF", I gave
away the gimmick of _Spider and Web_. (Which wasn't released for
another year.) Really killed the impact, eh?
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
* Doesn't matter who you vote for, if the Supreme Court votes for me.
Sean T Barrett
>Memento and Groundhog Day are actual works, though. Someone had an idea
>and they put months or years of effort into realizing it and *earned* the
>right to stake out a piece of intellectual ground. Which strikes me as
>not a bad metaphor: publishing an idea is like claiming a piece of land.
>Turning that idea into a *work* is like developing that land, turning into
>a garden. If I'm working on an idea and someone releases a game before
>I'm done that incorporates the same idea, that's like someone developing
>the land I had my eye on; sure, I'd be disappointed, but I'd've been
>beaten to the punch fair and square. But simply talking about the idea?
>That's like grabbing the land and then tossing a folding chair onto it.
Well, there was a beginnings of a discussion of this after the
prologue comp, but I don't recall anyone actually replying to
anyone else's questions or hypotheses.
Basically, while I sympathize with what you say above, I don't
see how you can draw a line in traditional media: the "hundred-word
story" and the short-story are both written forms involving
varying amounts of effort, and both could "ruin" the core idea
used in a novel. Is one of those acceptable and not the other?
Admittedly, in an interactive context, it's a lot more clear that
a prologue isn't interactive; and SpeedIFs don't tend to be about
"big ideas".
>> Most of us authors are smart enough to realize that ideas are cheap
>> and execution is everything.
>
>I'm not so sure that's true. I could just as easily say that execution is
>cheap -- a good writer can take *anything* and turn it into something
>that's at least decent, and it's often a fun project to take a really
>dubious starting point and try to salvage it -- but coming up with an idea
>worth executing is the hard part.
Hmm, well, true, I suppose there's something to be said for that,
at least when it comes to the *really good ideas*, but those seem
to be relatively rare. But I suppose that's the point.
By the way, if the subject was really the game which went
backwards *turn by turn*, I believe one of Meretzky's Spellcasting 101
games (probably the first) has a backwards sequence (some 10 or 30
moves long), so somebody had already staked out a fair portion
of that ground.
SeanB
Al Biggone
>Neener neener.
There has been some confusion on this topic. What happened was -- to
set the record straight -- that Mr Cadre's latest response to popular
culture stimuli was so gimmicky that I deleted it.
Hope this helps further a greater understanding.
Yours,
Big Al
Adam Cadre
> You could have shelved it for three months until everyone forgot
> the offending post.
Yeah, probably. This wasn't just a fit of pique, though; the incident
also made me realize that this was another case of having plunged into
coding with a clear idea only of the *form* of the work -- as noted,
working through the narratological implications was the raison d'etre of
the piece -- with just-in-time content, which wasn't really satisfying.
I have another thing I'm working on where both the form and the content
struck me as neat, so both would have to be spoiled before I'd become too
discouraged to continue.
Pamela Baucher
> I'd also like to see something like Groundhog Day. It seems perfect for IF.
Sort of OT since it's only a mere video game, but it IS chiefly an adventure
game with lots of puzzles and npc interaction, albeit with heavy platform and rpg
elements, but the most recent zelda game for the n64 had a VERY 'groundhog day'
sort of plot. You have three days to sort everything out, which isn't nearly
enough time, so you have to keep returning to the beginning of the day one,
where you retain your knowledge of the events to come (and some items) but
everything else (the npcs, etc.) is reset.
-pam
John Colagioia
> But it's hard to work up the enthusiasm to
> straightforwardly implement an idea you've heard come out of someone
> else's mouth -- or seen come out of someone else's keyboard, as the case
> may be.
This, I can sympathize with. In fact, I often find myself having trouble
completing something once I have scoped it out. It's presumably not so much
that "it's been done, so it's not worth doing," but rather the excitement is
drained from it, once it's been done.
[...]
> > Most of us authors are smart enough to realize that ideas are cheap
> > and execution is everything.
> I'm not so sure that's true. I could just as easily say that execution is
> cheap -- a good writer can take *anything* and turn it into something
> that's at least decent, and it's often a fun project to take a really
> dubious starting point and try to salvage it -- but coming up with an idea
> worth executing is the hard part.
Actually, when you get right down to it, both are really wrong. Ideas are
easy. Most of us have them all the time. Execution is a craft. It's not
easy, but once you learn it, it runs pretty smoothly and quickly. Mining the
ideas worth implementing, and building the idea into something worthwhile? As
the MasterCard commercials say, "Priceless."
That is, the best idea in the world won't help a hack writer, nor will the
best writing in the world save a dismal concept. Same goes for plot,
characterization, setting, description, pacing, and so on. None of these are
"the" most critical part, because they all suffer if one is bad.
Now, of course, as an artist (of any sort), you're looking to be "innovative,"
obviously you'll focus on concept, which is fine. But, I can't help thinking
that too much quality work is lost when an artist strives to be different.
Oh, well. Now I'm good and depressed. That'll show me...
OKB -- not okblacke
>Memento and Groundhog Day are actual works, though. Someone had an idea
>and they put months or years of effort into realizing it and *earned* the
>right to stake out a piece of intellectual ground.
I figured this would come up, and I don't agree with it. Are we then to
muzzle everybody with a good idea just because they don't have the time or
inclination to implement it? I believe that, if you put the time and effort
into creating the game, people will recognize this, and will understand that,
although someone else may have mentioned the idea, you really explored it and
brought it to life.
>> Most of us authors are smart enough to realize that ideas are cheap
>> and execution is everything.
>
>I'm not so sure that's true. I could just as easily say that execution is
>cheap -- a good writer can take *anything* and turn it into something
>that's at least decent, and it's often a fun project to take a really
>dubious starting point and try to salvage it -- but coming up with an idea
>worth executing is the hard part.
I see them as two separate things whose combination can make or break a
work. The idea is one thing and the execution is another. If the game relies
too much on the idea, it's not likely to be more than a novelty. If it relies
too much on the specifics of how it's done, it can seem tired.
Ross Presser
> M. D. Krauss <MDKr...@home.com> wrote:
>> That sounds like a really interesting movie.. actually, it sounds
>> familiar... I think I saw a comedy once with the same idea,
>> something about a private detective maybe...?
>
> Clean Slate. I never did see that.
>
> Personally, I've been wanting to do something like Groundhog's Day.
>
You mean like act two of Delusions?
--
Ross Presser * ross_p...@imtek.com
"Back stabbing is a sport best played by those that can't stand face
to face with their opponent." - Danny Taddei
Mel
> I'd also like to see something like Groundhog Day. It seems perfect for IF.
A lot of IF winds up reminding me of groundhog day, but it would be neat
to have it be intentional. ;>
Mel
Jaap van der Velde
> > detective maybe...?
> Clean Slate. I never did see that.
Don't bother with Clean Slate if you've seen Memento. The story
of M is more intelligent and engaging and CS is too much of a
comedy to really explore the idea. As a comedy Groundhog Day
works a lot better. I do think Groundhog day is the safer bet
for IF, since the only objective would be to finish the day the
right way. And since it is just the main idea that has to be
copied, the reliving of the same day over and over, a truely
original story could be based on it.
Grtz,
JAAP.
Carl Muckenhoupt
ve...@bigfoot.com says...
> I do think Groundhog day is the safer bet
> for IF, since the only objective would be to finish the day the
> right way. And since it is just the main idea that has to be
> copied, the reliving of the same day over and over, a truely
> original story could be based on it.
Sounds a bit like the middle section of "Delusions". Except that saying
that the goal there is to "finish the day the right way" can only be
taken as a very dark joke.
Ross Presser
I think I said that yesterday.
news:Xns90EE8FF51...@209.155.56.95
Yup.
Aris Katsaris
Jason Etheridge <pha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9jvbks$j91$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
> Personally, I've been wanting to do something like Groundhog's Day.
Well, this has been done atleast twice so far... <g> The first one is the
classic which everyone's mentioned... the second is that 'pool simulation'
some time back... <g>
Aris Katsaris
Jaap van der Velde
Cadre) wrote:
> Sean Barrett wrote:
> > Why does revealing the gimmick spoil it? Either the gimmick shows
> > up right away in the game, so there's nothing to spoil, or the
> > gimmick is operating behind the scenes, and most people won't realize
> > it's a game using the gimmick being discussed until it's over.
>
> It's not just a one-sentence gimmick, though. When I say "someone gave
> away the gimmick," I'm not referring to this conversation here, but one
> that happened on ifMUD, in which someone said, "Hmm, what would be the
> implications of an IF game running backwards?" and started naming some.
> Since examining these implications was the raison d'etre of my piece, by
> the time he was done there was really nothing in the work that would've
> been new to anyone who'd participated in that conversation. Which was
> only a few people, sure.
And I for one am still very much interested in other people's ideas
on this one. To see it implemented in a game or discussed for a
broader audience would be worth while.
Does ifMUD store transcripts for those of us in parts of the world
that may not be online at the right time of day, or without
the unlimited time to follow every conversation?
I understand your sentiments as far as losing enthousiam for
finishing a work, once you've heard someone else point out
most of the fun points prior to release. But I'd like to give
you the advice to just tune out next time you get the idea
people are discussing something alike to your projects. The
worst that could happen that way is that a small minority of
players will have the added pleasure of saying: "Hey, we
discussed that and now look what's happened!". That's a lot
better than your losing all interest in a project that no
doubt took a lot of time, energy and creativity up to the
point where you decided to drop it.
Grtz,
JAAP.
L. Ross Raszewski
>
>Does ifMUD store transcripts for those of us in parts of the world
>that may not be online at the right time of day, or without
>the unlimited time to follow every conversation?
Ifmud has a facility for this, but it requires that someone present
has the forsight to request a transcript from Alex.