Mahjong, isn't that a tile matching game?
Feico Nater
Yes, it happened several years ago. A shareware club offered a game
named Mahjongg, and I ordered it. I was rather disappointed to find
that it wasn't Mahjongg. It was a solitaire game where you had to make
a stack of Mahjong-tiles and remove them in pairs.
I wrote a letter to that club about the incorrect name of the game,
and they published the letter
Afterwards I saw many more versions of the same tile-matching game,
most of them named Mahjongg. One was named Taipei, I think it was
shipped with OS/2.
Last week I asked a colleague whether he was interested in Mahjongg.
Yes, he was. So I gave him a diskette with Mahjongg on it, the real
thing of course. He installed it, started it, and said: this is not
Mahjongg, this a very different game.
That's what has happened, all those misnamed tile-matching games have
caused people to think that Mahjongg is the name of a different game.
Windows 95 is shipped with four games, three of them use playing
cards. These games are named: Hearts, Freecell, Solitaire. What would
you think people would say if they were called Bridge?
---
Feico Nater, Netherlands
http://home.wxs.nl/~taaleffect
---
In matters of commerce the fault of the Dutch
is offering too little and asking too much.
Alan Kwan
On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:07:01 GMT, nate...@wxs.nl (Feico Nater) wrote:
>Yes, it happened several years ago. A shareware club offered a game
>named Mahjongg, and I ordered it. I was rather disappointed to find
>that it wasn't Mahjongg. It was a solitaire game where you had to make
>a stack of Mahjong-tiles and remove them in pairs.
> [...]
I agree. The mis-naming of the solitaire game leads to confusion.
The well-known solitaire game should be called "Turtle" IMO. When we
are playing "Memory" with mahjong tiles, we are not playing "Mahjong";
nor are we when we are playing some solitaire.
"Live life with Heart."
Alan Kwan / ta...@notme.netvigator.com
http://home.netvigator.com/~tarot (hard-core game reviews)
(please remove anti-spam section "notme." from mailing address)
J. R. Fitch
Nels Anderson was the author of the Shareware game Mahjongg. It is he
who is largely responsible for the confusion. Others had used mahjong
tiles, of course, but he's the one who actually used the name as well.
Sometime around 1990 I actually called him and gently chastised him for
it. He was very pleasant and politely remorseful.
--
Julian R. Fitch
Nine Dragons Software
351 Ulloa Street
San Francisco,
California 94127
415-664-3474 v.
415-564-3161 f.
jrf...@ninedragons.com
http://www.ninedragons.com
Alan Kwan
>Nels Anderson was the author of the Shareware game Mahjongg. It is he
>who is largely responsible for the confusion. Others had used mahjong
>tiles, of course, but he's the one who actually used the name as well.
>Sometime around 1990 I actually called him and gently chastised him for
>it. He was very pleasant and politely remorseful.
Did he know the 'real' thing when he did the mis-naming?
ACTSEARCH
Feico Nater wrote:
> A shareware club offered a game
>named Mahjongg, and I ordered it. I was rather disappointed to find
>that it wasn't Mahjongg. It was a solitaire game where you had to make
>a stack of Mahjong-tiles and remove them in pairs.
*** Which is why I put a warning for newbies about this in MJ FAQ #1.
>Afterwards I saw many more versions of the same tile-matching game,
>most of them named Mahjongg. One was named Taipei, I think it was
>shipped with OS/2.
*** I'm stifling my impulses. I promised not to rail against the Shanghai
imitators here on the newsgroup any more. . .
>Last week I asked a colleague whether he was interested in Mahjongg.
>Yes, he was. So I gave him a diskette with Mahjongg on it, the real
>thing of course. He installed it, started it, and said: this is not
>Mahjongg, this a very different game.
*** Well, he knows the difference /now/, right?
>That's what has happened, all those misnamed tile-matching games have
>caused people to think that Mahjongg is the name of a different game.
*** As "the Shanghai producer" and as a fairly recent (4 years) convert to the
delights of Mah-Jongg, I share Feico's consternation about this rampant
confusion. But I ought to point out for the record that, although Activision
is solely responsible for Shanghai (the game that all those
"Mah-Jongg-confusion-perpetrators" imitated), we never said that Shanghai was
Mah-Jongg. The Shanghai imitators needed a name for their games (they couldn't
use "Shanghai" because we trademarked it), and apparently they didn't know what
else to call it. I guess they didn't realize the harm they were foisting off
on the rest of us by erroneously calling their games "Mah-Jongg." Aarrgghh!
Now you went and got me started. I am stopping NOW, before I escalate.
Tom Sloper, Activision
Senior Producer, Shanghai
tsl...@activision.com
Acts...@aol.com
Now available: SHANGHAI: DYNASTY -- check our website for a preview and free
demo:
http://www4.activision.com/games/dynasty/
ACTSEARCH
Alan Kwan wrote:
>The well-known solitaire game should be called "Turtle" IMO. When we
>are playing "Memory" with mahjong tiles, we are not playing "Mahjong";
>nor are we when we are playing some solitaire.
*** The reason, I assume, for your choice of the name "Turtle" must be the
website story which was written by the original Shanghai producer, in which he
says Shanghai was based on "an ancient solitaire game called 'The Turtle,'"
right? Well, the original Shanghai designer/programmer denies this "ancient"
origin, and before I discussed it with him I had never found any description of
"an ancient solitaire game called 'The Turtle'" (in spite of a very long
search) -- BUT -- I /have/ found a description of a 2- or 3-player game called
"Catching The Tortoise," in the excellent Perlmen & Chan book 'The Chinese Game
of Mahjong' (it's in the books FAQ).
I will share P&C's description of "Catching The Tortoise" below, but first I
would like to point out that the similarity between the names "The Turtle" and
"Catching The Tortoise" will (IMO) just add further to the confusion. For that
reason and also for the reason that all the "solitaire Mah-Jongg" games out
there were created /after Shanghai/ (and therefore cannot but be regarded as
imitations of Shanghai, IMO), I don't recommend referring to them as "The
Turtle."
Perlmen & Chan describe "Catching The Tortoise" on pages 52 and 53 as follows
(because of copyright laws, I paraphrase):
"Players often play this 2- or 3-minute game to kill time while waiting for
other players, or as a break between games of Mah-Jongg.
"Each player picks a suit, and gathers all 36 of the tiles of that suit in
front of him on the table. Mix up all the tiles well, and organize them, face
down, into 4 horizontal rows of 9. Start by exposing any one tile of the first
row. That tile has a number -- place that tile (face up) at the top of the
correspondingly-numbered /column/ of tiles. For example, if it is a 7, count 7
columns from the left, and place the tile at the top of that column. Now push
(pull) that tile down until it is aligned with the top horizontal row of tiles,
causing a tile to pop out at the bottom. Turn that tile over and repeat the
process. Play in this manner until all tiles are exposed, or you have played
as far as you can and some tiles are still not exposed.
"When all players have played their suits as far as they can, payment in chips
is made. One chip ("$1") is paid for each tile still unexposed, to the player
who has the least unexposed tiles. If the winner has exposed all his tiles, he
collects double from the other players."
That is "Catching The Tortoise," accurately paraphrased from the description in
Perlmen & Chan. I maintain that this is a very different game from Shanghai
(and the imitations of Shanghai) -- and that therefore calling Shanghai (and
its imitators) "The Turtle" would be confusing. This game is actually a
solitaire game for 2 or 3 people to play simultaneously, to see who got farther
than the others did -- certainly it could also be played as a one-player game.
And it is not "tile-matching."
I admit that I have difficulty with the notion of making one catch-all name for
Shanghai and its imitators, but it is probably unfair of me to simply shoot
down every suggestion for one, without suggesting one myself. I propose
"tile-matching games" as a suitable catch-all name. As for myself, I will,
I'm afraid, find it difficult to say anything other than "Shanghai and its
imitators." [IMO, the only ones who ought to be mightily offended by this are
the imitators themselves.] "Shisenso" and "Toride," also perhaps loosely based
on Shanghai, would be lumped into this category as well, but they are
considerably less well-known anyway. Alan, what say you? "Tile-matching
games" work for you? It's descriptive and not misleading. . .
Back to "the Tortoise" -- the description in P&C leaves me wondering how the
initially-broken column is supposed to be handled. Play starts by choosing one
tile at random from the first horizontal row -- leaving a gap at the bottom of
the column there. Let's say it's column 3. Later in the game if the player
exposes a 3, he's supposed to place a tile at the top of that column and push
(pull) down -- I assume that he has to pull it far enough to force a tile out
the bottom (not just far enough so the top tile is even with the 4th row), but
the description in P&C isn't specific in this regard. That's the only way that
all of the columns could possibly be played.
ACTSEARCH
J.R. Fitch wrote:
>Nels Anderson was the author of the Shareware game Mahjongg. It is he
>who is largely responsible for the confusion. Others had used mahjong
>tiles, of course, but he's the one who actually used the name as well.
Well, Nels is certainly /one/ of the folks who is responsible for the name
confusion. Let's see who else we can blame for this (remember, Shanghai was
published in 1986):
Nels Anderson -- "Mah-Jong 4.1" (DOS, 1987)
Ron Balewski -- "Mah-Jongg -V-G-A- 3.1" (DOS, 1989)
Jürg von Känel -- "Mahjongg Solitaire 2.00" (O/S2, 1993)
Nels Anderson again -- " Dragon's Bane: Mah Jongg II" (Windows, 1995)
Brenda Carpenter and Sanjay Vakil -- "Mahjongg" (Newton, Mac, Windows, 1995)
Martin Noel and Steve Moraff -- Morejong (DOS, Windows, 1995)
Steve Moraff again -- Spherejongg (Windows, 1995)
Please don't hate Activision for the confusion! It wasn't us who caused it!
We just created Shanghai.
P.S. In case anybody is wondering why I didn't include "Taipei" and other
Shanghai imitations, it's because those games at least had the originality of
unique titles -- the point under discussion here is "games that play like
Shanghai but are misleadingly entitled 'Mah-Jongg' or a derivative thereof."
J. R. Fitch
ACTSEARCH wrote:
>
> J.R. Fitch wrote:
> >Nels Anderson was the author of the Shareware game Mahjongg. It is he
> >who is largely responsible for the confusion. Others had used mahjong
> >tiles, of course, but he's the one who actually used the name as well.
>
> Well, Nels is certainly /one/ of the folks who is responsible for the name
> confusion. Let's see who else we can blame for this (remember, Shanghai was
> published in 1986):
>
> Nels Anderson -- "Mah-Jong 4.1" (DOS, 1987)
> Ron Balewski -- "Mah-Jongg -V-G-A- 3.1" (DOS, 1989)
> Jürg von Känel -- "Mahjongg Solitaire 2.00" (O/S2, 1993)
> Nels Anderson again -- " Dragon's Bane: Mah Jongg II" (Windows, 1995)
> Brenda Carpenter and Sanjay Vakil -- "Mahjongg" (Newton, Mac, Windows, 1995)
> Martin Noel and Steve Moraff -- Morejong (DOS, Windows, 1995)
> Steve Moraff again -- Spherejongg (Windows, 1995)
Thanks for the excellent detail, Tom.
I think that this kangaroo court can find Nels guilty as charged, in
that the others can claim that they followed his lead.
J. R. Fitch
Alan Kwan wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:27:20 -0700, "J. R. Fitch"
>
> >Nels Anderson was the author of the Shareware game Mahjongg. It is he
> >who is largely responsible for the confusion. Others had used mahjong
> >tiles, of course, but he's the one who actually used the name as well.
> >it. He was very pleasant and politely remorseful.
>
> Did he know the 'real' thing when he did the mis-naming?
J. R. Fitch
Tom,
P&C's description makes it sound like it was the model for Tetris, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tom Sloper, Activision
> Senior Producer, Shanghai
> tsl...@activision.com
> Acts...@aol.com
> Now available: SHANGHAI: DYNASTY -- check our website for a preview and free
> demo:
> http://www4.activision.com/games/dynasty/
--
Alan Kwan
On 25 Jun 1998 20:49:05 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote:
>Alan Kwan wrote:
>>The well-known solitaire game should be called "Turtle" IMO. When we
>>are playing "Memory" with mahjong tiles, we are not playing "Mahjong";
>>nor are we when we are playing some solitaire.
>
>*** The reason, I assume, for your choice of the name "Turtle" must be the
>website story which was written by the original Shanghai producer, in which he
>says Shanghai was based on "an ancient solitaire game called 'The Turtle,'"
>right?
Or rather, it is based on the description of the game in Mr. KAN
Yi-Ching's book, p. 151. Whether his source of the game traces back
to Activision's Shanghai or not is beyond my knowledge.
He called it (in jyut ping) "caak3 paai2 gwai1" .
拆牌龜
>I admit that I have difficulty with the notion of making one catch-all name for
>Shanghai and its imitators, but it is probably unfair of me to simply shoot
>down every suggestion for one, without suggesting one myself. I propose
>"tile-matching games" as a suitable catch-all name.
> As for myself, I will,
>I'm afraid, find it difficult to say anything other than "Shanghai and its
>imitators." [IMO, the only ones who ought to be mightily offended by this are
>the imitators themselves.] "Shisenso" and "Toride," also perhaps loosely based
>on Shanghai, would be lumped into this category as well, but they are
>considerably less well-known anyway. Alan, what say you? "Tile-matching
>games" work for you? It's descriptive and not misleading. . .
"Tile-matching games" cover more than Turtle. Even /if/ Turtle was
indeed designed by some Activition staff, I see it as a good thing
when other designers borrowed the concept and designed other
"tile-matching games" such as Shisenso and Toride. I won't call a
game that has as many elements added as Mah Jong Wall an "imitator".
Just as Puyo and Tetris Attack are not Tetris imitators.
"Tile-matching games" should refer to the general category of games in
which matching tiles are removed from some formation. Even if Turtle
is the first tile-matching game, it is not _the_ tile-matching game.
Using "tile-matching games" when one means Turtle is as imprecise (and
possibly misleading) as using "card games" when one means Bridge.
>Back to "the Tortoise" -- the description in P&C leaves me wondering how the
>initially-broken column is supposed to be handled. Play starts by choosing one
>tile at random from the first horizontal row -- leaving a gap at the bottom of
>the column there. Let's say it's column 3. Later in the game if the player
>exposes a 3, he's supposed to place a tile at the top of that column and push
>(pull) down -- I assume that he has to pull it far enough to force a tile out
>the bottom (not just far enough so the top tile is even with the 4th row), but
>the description in P&C isn't specific in this regard. That's the only way that
>all of the columns could possibly be played.
I guess that's so.
DJWhitfill
I was talking to a co-worker from China and my impression was that something
very similar to the tile matching game was played by children (with the Mah
Jong tiles)-sort of a way to start getting them familiar with the tiles. Am I
out to lunch on this or what?
Perhaps a Princess...
Alan Kwan wrote:
> "Tile-matching games" should refer to the general category of games in
> which matching tiles are removed from some formation. Even if Turtle
> is the first tile-matching game, it is not _the_ tile-matching game.
> Using "tile-matching games" when one means Turtle is as imprecise (and
> possibly misleading) as using "card games" when one means Bridge.
Magic: The Gathering and all of its imitators are quite happily referred
to as collectible trading card games.
Perhaps. Call them Mahjongg-tile matching games?
Sarah Heacock
sa...@eskimo.com
Alan Kwan
Mr. Kan does state in his book that the "Turtle" game is played by
children.
Alan Kwan
Let me clarify. "Tile-matching games" or "mahjong-tile matching
games" are OK names IMO for referring to a collection of games, but
that still leaves us with a need for a name for a specific game
"Turtle" ("Shanghai").
ACTSEARCH
J.R. Fitch wrote:
P&C's description makes it sound like it was the model for Tetris, no?
*** I don't think so. Tetris is a 2D version of a puzzle toy I had when I was
a kid. Various shapes made from squares stuck together, which must fit snugly
together without gaps. This "Tortoise" game requires the use of numbers which
correspond to column numbers.
ACTSEARCH
I had written:
>*** The reason, I assume, for your choice of the name "Turtle" must be the
>website story which was written by the original Shanghai producer, in which he
>says Shanghai was based on "an ancient solitaire game called 'The Turtle,'"
>right?
Alan Kwan responded:
Or rather, it is based on the description of the game in Mr. KAN
Yi-Ching's book, p. 151. Whether his source of the game traces back
to Activision's Shanghai or not is beyond my knowledge.
He called it (in juet ping) "caak3 paai2 gwai1" .
*** Is Mr. Kan's book in English or Chinese? If English, I am compelled to try
to obtain a copy. What's the original publishing date? If before 1986, then
you have indeed found something that describes such a game predating Shanghai.
And does "caak3 paai2 gwai1" translate to "The Turtle"? If so, that certainly
is confusing, given the 'Tortoise' game described by Perlmen & Chan.
Alan Kwan continued:
"Tile-matching games" cover more than Turtle. Even /if/ Turtle was
indeed designed by some Activition staff, I see it as a good thing
when other designers borrowed the concept and designed other
"tile-matching games" such as Shisenso and Toride. I won't call a
game that has as many elements added as Mah Jong Wall an "imitator".
Just as Puyo and Tetris Attack are not Tetris imitators.
*** I agree that Mah Jong Wall joins Shisenso and Toride as something
sufficiently different from Shanghai that it need not be lumped in with the
Shanghai imitators. However, I don't really see a need to have a special name
for "games similar to Shisenso, Toride, and Mah Jong Wall" separate from a
special name for "games that imitate Shanghai." As for "Tetris Attack," that
is clearly not a Tetris imitator but rather a Tetris /sequel/.
Alan continued:
"Tile-matching games" should refer to the general category of games in
which matching tiles are removed from some formation.
*** Yes. So? It seems to me to satisfy the need, does it not? It works to
describe Shanghai and its imitators, and to a certain extent could even loosely
be used to include Shisenso, Toride, and Mah Jong Wall.
Alan continued:
Even if Turtle
is the first tile-matching game, it is not _the_ tile-matching game.
Using "tile-matching games" when one means Turtle is as imprecise (and
possibly misleading) as using "card games" when one means Bridge.
*** I need to understand you precisely. By "Turtle," I assume you mean "the
game described by Mr. Kan, which is also how Shanghai and its imitators are
played" -- and /not/ "Catching the Tortoise" as described by Perlmen & Chan?
Certainly, if one is talking about Bridge specifically, it would be imprecise
to say "card games." Similarly, if one is talking about Taipei (which is not
precisely the same thing as Shanghai, even though it is obviously an imitation
of it), it would be imprecise to say "Shanghai." If one is talking about Nels
Anderson's so-called "Mahjong," then it would be imprecise to say "Mah-Jongg."
Precisely under what conditions do you need a special term for "games precisely
like Shanghai and its imitators, not including Shisenso, Toride, and Mah Jong
Wall"? Under precisely what conditions does the term "tile-matching games"
insufficiently delineate those games from Mah-Jongg?
ACTSEARCH
DJWhitfill wrote:
I was talking to a co-worker from China and my impression was that something
very similar to the tile matching game was played by children (with the Mah
Jong tiles)-sort of a way to start getting them familiar with the tiles. Am I
out to lunch on this or what?
*** Why would you be "out to lunch"? If a co-worker said this to you, then he
said this to you; you are not responsible! :o) As for /what/ he said to you
(that something similar to Shanghai was played by Chinese children, if I follow
you correctly), it would be of great interest to me to have a conversation with
him so I could learn if it really was /Shanghai/ that he's talking about, and
if that game had been around for a very long time (prior to 1986). But your
brief description of a conversation with a third party is not very conclusive.
Even if it turns out to be proved that there really was a game similar to
Shanghai prior to 1986, that does not change the facts:
1. That the original Shanghai was very successful, and that its highly visible
success is solely responsible for having spawned all the imitations that have
cropped up since 1986.
2. That a game played just like Shanghai is still not "Mah-Jongg" and it's
misleading to use that name.
Alan Kwan
On 26 Jun 1998 21:15:30 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote:
>*** Is Mr. Kan's book in English or Chinese?
Chinese.
> What's the original publishing date?
February 1984.
>And does "caak3 paai2 gwai1" translate to "The Turtle"?
gwai1 is "turtle". caak3 is "demolish". paai2 is, of course,
"tile". Translates to "demolish a turtle of tiles".
> If so, that certainly
>is confusing, given the 'Tortoise' game described by Perlmen & Chan.
I think the name "turtle" should be given to the tile-matching game,
since the original configuration is intended to look like a turtle.
I don't think it's confusing if we stick to the full name "catching
the tortoise" as described by P&C. In any case, the P&C "game" is
merely a solitaire of pure luck and no strategy.
>*** I agree that Mah Jong Wall joins Shisenso and Toride as something
>sufficiently different from Shanghai that it need not be lumped in with the
>Shanghai imitators. However, I don't really see a need to have a special name
>for "games similar to Shisenso, Toride, and Mah Jong Wall" separate from a
>special name for "games that imitate Shanghai."
I agree that they, _including_ Turtle/Shanghai, should be collectively
called "tile-matching games".
> As for "Tetris Attack," that
>is clearly not a Tetris imitator but rather a Tetris /sequel/.
It is really no Tetris imitator nor sequel. The original Japanese
version is called "Panel de Pon" ("Pon" is our familiar mahjong
triplet call), featuring cute fairies instead of Yoshi characters.
It has nothing to do with Tetris at all. The only reason that the
overseas version is called "Tetris Attack" is marketing (name
recognition).
>Precisely under what conditions do you need a special term for "games precisely
>like Shanghai and its imitators, not including Shisenso, Toride, and Mah Jong
>Wall"? Under precisely what conditions does the term "tile-matching games"
>insufficiently delineate those games from Mah-Jongg?
My point is that we need a name specifically for the game
Turtle/Shanghai when the name "Shanghai" is to be avoided for some
reason. We see the problem that the name "mahjong" is often used.
"Tile matching game" does not adequately serve this purpose,
obviously.
Feico Nater
On 25 Jun 1998 20:48:19 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote in
rec.games.mahjong:
>Mah-Jongg. The Shanghai imitators needed a name for their games (they couldn't
>use "Shanghai" because we trademarked it), and apparently they didn't know what
>else to call it.
Those who called it Taipei apparently did know.
Naoki Haga
On 25 Jun 1998 20:48:19 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote:
>>That's what has happened, all those misnamed tile-matching games have
>>caused people to think that Mahjongg is the name of a different game.
>
>*** As "the Shanghai producer" and as a fairly recent (4 years) convert to the
>delights of Mah-Jongg, I share Feico's consternation about this rampant
>confusion.
As "the Kyodai Mahjongg producer" and as a really recent (2 months)
convert to the (complex) delights of Mah-Jongg, I'd like to say that,
well, since the name "Shanghai" is copyrighted (Tetris authors don't
have this problem apparently...), the only way to "categorize" the
game is to call it, not "Shanghai clone" but "Mahjongg Solitaire
game", as it was called in "Mahjongg for Windows [by Ron Balewski]"
and "Mahjongg [for what ? ;))] [by Nels Anderson]". I'd rather have
called it "Turtle" as well, but well, maybe people who were looking
for MJ-solitaire games wouldn't have found it on the Net.
and this "drawback" has an advantage : it may lead people to real
mahjongg-related websites, and may get them interested into the
game...
>Mah-Jongg. The Shanghai imitators needed a name for their games (they couldn't
>use "Shanghai" because we trademarked it),
that's it ;) it's so strange to trademark a city name ;)
but after all, m$ did trademark the name "Windows"..... ;)
>and apparently they didn't know what
>else to call it.
at least Nels Anderson and/or Ron Balewski (I don't know who of them
found that name... since they never answered my mail I can't say)
there are dozens of MJ-solitaire games out there now (MJ Pro 3000, 2D
MJ, Dragons, Kyodai, and so on), and most of them (except Dragons and
some others) found out that it would be easier for people to find
their game if they'd call it "Mahjongg".
I'd like to point out the fact that, while I'm effectively calling my
game a "mahjongg-solitaire type game", its name is originally
"Kyodai". Now there are EVEN some Kyodai clones (I found one day a
Java program on the web that used my tilesets and my musics... I
didn't care to write to the guy because I felt quite honored by this
fact... even though I wasn't credited...)
a strange notice : some people actually think that i'm the author of
Ron Balewski's or Nels Anderson's games. Did you get that kind of mail
at Activision too ? (things like, "I liked your DOS version in 1990
but I think your Windows version is even better"... ;))
> I guess they didn't realize the harm they were foisting off
>on the rest of us by erroneously calling their games "Mah-Jongg." Aarrgghh!
>Now you went and got me started. I am stopping NOW, before I escalate.
I guess there are more important things to worry about in this world.
it's just a question of terminology... nobody's going to die because
of that... ;)
--
René-Gilles Deberdt, Lille, France
Cyber Namida, http://namida.animanga.com
Don't forget to try Kyodai Mahjongg :
http://www.mygale.org/namida/kyodai.html
Naoki Haga
On 25 Jun 1998 20:50:10 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote:
>P.S. In case anybody is wondering why I didn't include "Taipei" and other
>Shanghai imitations, it's because those games at least had the originality of
>unique titles
oh.... thanks for me ;-)
Naoki Haga
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:57:16 GMT, nate...@wxs.nl (Feico Nater) wrote:
>On 25 Jun 1998 20:48:19 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote in
>rec.games.mahjong:
>
>>Mah-Jongg. The Shanghai imitators needed a name for their games (they couldn't
>>use "Shanghai" because we trademarked it), and apparently they didn't know what
>>else to call it.
>
>Those who called it Taipei apparently did know.
probably Microsoft didn't want to have problems with Activision at
that time ? ;)))
Well, actually they probably just took a map of Asia and found the
city "Taipei" in front of Shanghai...
Well, when Activision threatened me of prosecution and I was forced to
find very quickly a new name for my game, that's what I did as well (I
just wanted to follow the fun ;))
But I never wanted to call my game "Beijing" or anything like that.
Maybe "Pekin" would have been could but I think it's only used in
France (it's the other name of Beijing).
How about "Tokyo" for the next one ? ;)
J. R. Fitch
Mon. Deberdt,
> I guess there are more important things to worry about in this world.
> it's just a question of terminology... nobody's going to die because
> of that... ;)
frustrating having to deal with it every day.
Imagine if you were the developer of a Chess game. Every time it came up
in conversation, someone would say "Chess? Oh, that's that game where
you dump all the pieces on the board and match them up while you're
doing your nails, right?"
I take a certain pride in having brought real mahjong to the attention
of scores of thousands in the U.S. and abroad; now if they'll all just
tell a friend who tells a friend...
ACTSEARCH
Alan Kwan wrote,
On 26 Jun 1998 21:15:30 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote:
>*** Is Mr. Kan's book in English or Chinese?
Chinese.
> What's the original publishing date?
February 1984.
>And does "caak3 paai2 gwai1" translate to "The Turtle"?
gwai1 is "turtle". caak3 is "demolish". paai2 is, of course,
"tile". Translates to "demolish a turtle of tiles".
> If so, that certainly
>is confusing, given the 'Tortoise' game described by Perlmen & Chan.
I think the name "turtle" should be given to the tile-matching game,
since the original configuration is intended to look like a turtle.
I don't think it's confusing if we stick to the full name "catching
the tortoise" as described by P&C. In any case, the P&C "game" is
merely a solitaire of pure luck and no strategy.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Alan, then you are saying that Kan's book, written in 1984 (two years
before the original Shanghai was released) describes a game called "Demolishing
the Turtle of Tiles" (as opposed to "Catching the Tortoise"), which plays
identical to Shanghai? Since I cannot hope to read the Chinese book, I have to
rely on you for this info (and from our long association here at the newsgroup,
I have no reason to disbelieve you). Does the book show a picture of "the
turtle" built from tiles, by any chance, and if so, does it resemble the
original Shanghai layout? Can you send me a photocopy of the pertinent section
of the book or help me obtain a copy of the book? I know I'm asking a lot...
ACTSEARCH
>>acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) had written:
>>The Shanghai imitators needed a name for their games (they couldn't
>>use "Shanghai" because we trademarked it), and apparently they didn't know
>>what
>>else to call it.
>From: nate...@wxs.nl (Feico Nater):
>Those who called it Taipei apparently did know.
Well, yeah. I should perhaps clarify that we were discussing those who, in
programming games inspired by Shanghai, called their games "Mah-Jongg" or a
variant thereof, thereby causing a great deal of confusion and consternation
for folks who care what is Mah-Jongg and what isn't.
Alan Kwan
On 28 Jun 1998 05:13:36 GMT, acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) wrote:
>*** Alan, then you are saying that Kan's book, written in 1984 (two years
>before the original Shanghai was released) describes a game called "Demolishing
>the Turtle of Tiles" (as opposed to "Catching the Tortoise"), which plays
>identical to Shanghai? Since I cannot hope to read the Chinese book, I have to
>rely on you for this info (and from our long association here at the newsgroup,
>I have no reason to disbelieve you). Does the book show a picture of "the
>turtle" built from tiles, by any chance, and if so, does it resemble the
>original Shanghai layout? Can you send me a photocopy of the pertinent section
>of the book or help me obtain a copy of the book? I know I'm asking a lot...
The page describes a game that looks suspiciously like the origin of
Shanghai, if not Shanghai itself. The player builds a turtle-shaped
structure with mahjong tiles, then remove matching pairs according to
the rules in Shanghai. There are possible minor differences such as a
minor difference in the original configuration, and that tiles are
possibly not turned face-up until they become accessible. There are
no diagrams.
I can quote the relevent page in Big5 encoding, if you need that.
Or I can send you a copy of the book for HK$42 + postage.
ACTSEARCH
>From: ta...@notme.netvigator.com (Alan Kwan)
>I can quote the relevent page in Big5 encoding, if you need that.
>Or I can send you a copy of the book for HK$42 + postage.
>
>
Thanks, Alan. To have a copy of the book would probably be better. I'll write
you offline.
Tom Sloper
Klaus Ole Kristiansen
acts...@aol.com (ACTSEARCH) writes:
>J.R. Fitch wrote:
>P&C's description makes it sound like it was the model for Tetris, no?
>*** I don't think so. Tetris is a 2D version of a puzzle toy I had when I was
>a kid. Various shapes made from squares stuck together, which must fit snugly
>together without gaps. This "Tortoise" game requires the use of numbers which
>correspond to column numbers.
This Turtle game is identical to the King Solitaire played with ordinary
cards.
Klaus O K
ACTSEARCH
>From: kl...@diku.dk (Klaus Ole Kristiansen)
>> This "Tortoise" game requires the use of numbers which
>>correspond to column numbers.
>
>This Turtle game is identical to the King Solitaire played with ordinary
>cards.
"Catching the Tortoise," you mean. Interesting. I'll look up that King
Solitaire game...
Thanks for the tip, Klaus