The definition of born dead

362 views
Skip to first unread message

Björn Bergström

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 5:51:54 AM6/28/04
to
Hi all,

I just found that my little cellphone roguelike was classified as born
dead on the roguelike graveyard (http://www.graveyard.uni.cc/). I'm glad
that Dweller is mentioned on other sites but I'm not sure that the
definition of born dead is clear. Wheen googling for born dead in
r.g.r.dev I found this definition:

---begin r.g.r.dev snippet---
From: copx (inv...@invalid.com)
Subject: born dead roguelikes
View: Complete Thread (137 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
Date: 2003-05-21 19:42:35 PST

Classic case No.1: 'the programmer's roguelike"
=================================
These little bastards are my favorites. Their "born dead"
status is obvious:

Signs:
- The author makes a big fuss about in what programming
language the game will be written. This is not a game
feature at all. And the author shows right away that he
really just wants todo some finger training in his fav. PL
instead of writing a game.

- Because the author is really only fascinated by the programming
challenge he probably doesn't have any real new gameplay
ideas at all. He will focus on programming challenges like dungeon
building, FOV and pathfinding and then abandon the project.

- If he mentions any 'unique' 'features' at all these 'features' probably
won't add much/anything to the actual gameplay but are interesting
to program:
Classic examples:
"players and monsters/NPCs share the same code"
"body-part system"

- Before abandoning the project he might start talking about
turning the game into an engine.

---end r.g.r.dev snippet---

If I try to look at Dweller objectively (hard to do on your own project) I
find that:

- I haven't made a fuss about the programming language. I have used the
fact that it is, to my knowledge, the only RL on a cellphone as a unique
selling point, but I don't see how that classifies Dweller as a born dead.

- I have made an effort to get working dungeon generation and FOV going,
but that can almost be seen as a minimum requierment for any roguelike.
Other than that my main focus has been to get as much as possible of the
"standard roguelike features" in place and finding a working user
interface for a roguelike on a cellphone.

- I have refrained myself from adding 'unique' 'features' but instead
tried to create a system with simple rules that still could be fun to
play. My main focus with Dweller has and will always be "simple and fun to
play" not fancy features.

- There will be no roguelike engine for cellphones...

I agree with copx definition of a "born dead" but I'm not sure that the
term is used correctly all the time. What do you think?

/Björn

Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 5:57:43 AM6/28/04
to
Björn Bergström schrieb:

> Hi all,
>
> I just found that my little cellphone roguelike was classified as born
> dead on the roguelike graveyard (http://www.graveyard.uni.cc/). I'm glad
> that Dweller is mentioned on other sites but I'm not sure that the
> definition of born dead is clear. Wheen googling for born dead in
> r.g.r.dev I found this definition:
>
> ---begin r.g.r.dev snippet---
> From: copx (inv...@invalid.com)
> Subject: born dead roguelikes

[...]


> Classic case No.1: 'the programmer's roguelike"
> =================================
> These little bastards are my favorites. Their "born dead"
> status is obvious:
>
> Signs:
> - The author makes a big fuss about in what programming
> language the game will be written. This is not a game
> feature at all. And the author shows right away that he
> really just wants todo some finger training in his fav. PL
> instead of writing a game.
>
> - Because the author is really only fascinated by the programming
> challenge he probably doesn't have any real new gameplay
> ideas at all. He will focus on programming challenges like dungeon
> building, FOV and pathfinding and then abandon the project.
>
> - If he mentions any 'unique' 'features' at all these 'features' probably
> won't add much/anything to the actual gameplay but are interesting
> to program:
> Classic examples:
> "players and monsters/NPCs share the same code"
> "body-part system"
>
> - Before abandoning the project he might start talking about
> turning the game into an engine.
>
> ---end r.g.r.dev snippet---

> I agree with copx definition of a "born dead" but I'm not sure that the

> term is used correctly all the time. What do you think?

I don't agree with his defintion at all. H-World classifies in most of
above categories, but I refuse to call it born dead!

Copx once told me H-World/The Jungle will die soon. This was about a
year ago. Now his own project is almost dead, but H-World is still living.

> /Björn

c.u.
Hajo

Björn Bergström

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 6:38:56 AM6/28/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:

You're quite right Hansjörg, but you have to agree that there has been
quite a few announcements of new roguelikes/roguelike engines where the
authour had grand ideas of complex worlds, with random quests and a life
of it's own. Most of these announcements were the first and last time we
heard of that particular project. H-World is far from dead and I salute
your devotion and dedication. I'm pretty confident that H-World will go
really far and I do not see H-world as a born dead.

>> /Björn
>
>
> c.u.
> Hajo

Jakub Debski

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 7:11:24 AM6/28/04
to
Björn Bergström wrote:
> I just found that my little cellphone roguelike was classified as born
> dead on the roguelike graveyard (http://www.graveyard.uni.cc/). I'm
> glad that Dweller is mentioned on other sites but I'm not sure that
> the definition of born dead is clear. Wheen googling for born dead in
> r.g.r.dev I found this definition:

Well... on my website all the roguelikes "in development" are born deads :P
It's just a matter of time to put them into Zombies and then into Graves...
I'm damn optimist ;)

regards,
Jakub
--
"We're just toys in the hands of Xom"
www.xenocide.w.pl - SF roguelike in development
www.graveyard.uni.cc - visit Roguelike Graveyard
www.alamak0ta.republika.pl - my other projects

Jakub Debski

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 7:15:45 AM6/28/04
to
Björn Bergström wrote:
> of it's own. Most of these announcements were the first and last time
> we heard of that particular project. H-World is far from dead and I
> salute your devotion and dedication. I'm pretty confident that
> H-World will go really far and I do not see H-world as a born dead.

Ah, H-World, I'm adding it to Born Deads right now... ;)

crichmon

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 7:21:22 AM6/28/04
to

"Björn Bergström" <bjorn.b...@roguelikedevelopment.org> wrote in
message news:2ka824F...@uni-berlin.de...


I think copx has cleverly created a generic obituary to all roguelike
development that can easilly applied to anyone who closely fits a "newbie"
classification. For what purpose though? To positively serve the r.g.r.dev
community? Or to selfishly serve his own desires and sense of elitism?

crichmon


Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 7:22:23 AM6/28/04
to
Jakub Debski schrieb:

> Björn Bergström wrote:
>
>>I just found that my little cellphone roguelike was classified as born
>>dead on the roguelike graveyard (http://www.graveyard.uni.cc/). I'm
>>glad that Dweller is mentioned on other sites but I'm not sure that
>>the definition of born dead is clear. Wheen googling for born dead in
>>r.g.r.dev I found this definition:
>
> Well... on my website all the roguelikes "in development" are born deads :P
> It's just a matter of time to put them into Zombies and then into Graves...
> I'm damn optimist ;)

Eventually that's right. But some projects have a quite prosperous life
between being bron and starting to die :)

Maybe you could do something like follows.

Projects of more than 6 months age could be judged this way:

- new release during last 6 months? -> alive
- new release during last 6-12 months? -> crawling
- no release since 12 months? -> sleeping
- no release since 24 months? -> almost dead
- no release since 36 months? -> no hope anymore/waiting to be revived

Projects of less than 6 months age could be judged this way:

- just emails/news posts available -> hot air/vaporware
- design docs available -> planning
- demo available -> prototyping

> regards,
> Jakub

c.u.
Hajo

Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 7:39:30 AM6/28/04
to
Jakub Debski schrieb:

> Björn Bergström wrote:
>
>>of it's own. Most of these announcements were the first and last time
>>we heard of that particular project. H-World is far from dead and I
>>salute your devotion and dedication. I'm pretty confident that
>>H-World will go really far and I do not see H-world as a born dead.
>
> Ah, H-World, I'm adding it to Born Deads right now... ;)

<evil thoughts>
The mighty Voodo king will get you!

The electrons of your message carry the link, the evil powers get their
path, your computer will be doomed #8^&
</evil thoughts>

Please, if you want to stuff one of my projects in your graveyard, take
Iso-Angband. It's updated about once a year, and can be considered
almost dead. There haven't been major updates the last two years.

But H-World has a history of continuous development, since alost three
years now:
http://h-world.simugraph.com/news.html

I really object seeing this as born dead or otherwise endangered
project. There are even some people who started to make game modules for
it, e.g. ABCGi and Vlad Grynchyshyn, both known in this group.

I mean, you should be able to find a lot of more or less dead projects
for your site, but Joseph Hewitts GearHead, Björn Bergströms Dweller and
H-World are definitely alive.

OTOH even Iso-Angband isn't really dead. IIRC Jürgen Frieling is working
on a ToME version of the display code and has converted several hundred
of David Gervais' tiles to be used with the Iso-View code.

> regards,
> Jakub

c.u.
Hajo

Björn Bergström

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 8:10:52 AM6/28/04
to

I think this is a good way to treat new and old roguelikes. It gives
visitors a fair chance to judge the state of an RL.

>> regards,
>> Jakub
>
>
> c.u.
> Hajo

/Björn

Mad Fly Thug

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 11:12:14 AM6/28/04
to
ShockFrost

Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 11:17:35 AM6/28/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:
> Jakub Debski schrieb:
<snip>

> I really object seeing this as born dead or otherwise endangered
> project. There are even some people who started to make game modules
> for it, e.g. ABCGi and Vlad Grynchyshyn, both known in this group.
>
> I mean, you should be able to find a lot of more or less dead projects
> for your site, but Joseph Hewitts GearHead, Björn Bergströms Dweller
> and H-World are definitely alive.

Hajo! Don't get offended - Roguelike Graveyard is just a comical idea to
promote roguelikes. The fact that games like H-World and GearHead are there
doesn't mean their dead ;).

regarda,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Mystic Triad

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 11:54:06 AM6/28/04
to

"crichmon" <crich...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SaTDc.17161$bs4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

>
> I think copx has cleverly created a generic obituary to all roguelike
> development that can easilly applied to anyone who closely fits a "newbie"
> classification. For what purpose though? To positively serve the
r.g.r.dev
> community? Or to selfishly serve his own desires and sense of elitism?
>

survey says... DING! I think the latter nails it quite perfectly.


Gerry Quinn

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 5:34:46 PM6/28/04
to
In article <2kadbhF...@uni-berlin.de>,
hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de says...

>
> Projects of more than 6 months age could be judged this way:
>
> - new release during last 6 months? -> alive
> - new release during last 6-12 months? -> crawling
> - no release since 12 months? -> sleeping
> - no release since 24 months? -> almost dead
> - no release since 36 months? -> no hope anymore/waiting to be revived

What about projects that are *finished*. Not everybody believes in
continually releasing beta versions of software. (Personally, I don't
release beta versions ever. Sometimes a released version may not have
all the features I plan, but it is always functional.)

There is no reason to update a project that is finished, and no reason
to consider it dead either.

- Gerry Quinn

SZDev - Slash

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 6:41:14 PM6/28/04
to

"Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> escribió en el mensaje
news:cbpcgg$1mm$1...@inews.gazeta.pl...

I dunno why, but I can't see the comical thing there... i'm sorry, but if
someone enters a website that says:

<quote>
Born Dead:
In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead games
try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think about bright
future. As you see they didn't learn anything from previously dead: you have
no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving is just a fake toy for children.
</quote>

They will not leave with a good impression of the game, plus "Born Dead"
implies that no matter how much efforts are made, they are not getting
anywhere.... and I think they are...

Putting dweller or HWorld there would be comparing them with something any
newbie comes and writes in two weeks, full of emotions, just to never
finish...

well just my toughts...

> regarda,
> Kornel Kisielewicz
>
>

Santiago Z


Jeff Lait

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 8:03:04 PM6/28/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote in message news:<2ka8ctF...@uni-berlin.de>...
> Björn Bergström schrieb:

>
> > I just found that my little cellphone roguelike was classified as born
> > dead on the roguelike graveyard (http://www.graveyard.uni.cc/). I'm glad
> > that Dweller is mentioned on other sites but I'm not sure that the
> > definition of born dead is clear.
>
> I don't agree with his defintion at all. H-World classifies in most of
> above categories, but I refuse to call it born dead!

The category "Born Dead" is intentionally deprecatory. The point was
to avoid copx's categorization of projects based on how successful
they would be, but to instead classify all projects as doomed. This
places some sense of perspective and humility on roguelike authors.

A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
graveyard itself:

"In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
is just a fake toy for children."

I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.
--
Jeff Lait
(POWDER: http://wwww.zincland.com/powder)

ABCGi

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 8:21:51 PM6/28/04
to

It looks pretty grud damn alive on my phone! I've been downloading new updates
every month for a while now, so if it was ever "dead" it's certainly alive.

Copx definition is a subset of "born dead" programs, the higher level abstracted
defintion would be: any project that stops shortly after it begins and is not
revived. There are many reasons this can happen to a project, not just the ones
copx mentioned. A good design skill is to detect a "dead duck" as early as
possible in a project and "can it", thus saving the most effort.

--
ABCGi ab...@yahoo.com http://abcgi.fly.to S14 D15 I17 W12 C9

Mike Blackney

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 9:33:27 PM6/28/04
to
"Jeff Lait" <torespon...@hotmail.com> communicated:

>
> The category "Born Dead" is intentionally deprecatory. The point was
> to avoid copx's categorization of projects based on how successful
> they would be, but to instead classify all projects as doomed. This
> places some sense of perspective and humility on roguelike authors.

Fair enough for you to say: your game's not on there! Noted, neither is
mine... *sob*

> A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
> graveyard itself:
>
> "In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
> games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
> about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
> previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
> is just a fake toy for children."
>
> I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.

Umm. Because the games are alive? We all know what born dead means and
it's not merely humbling - it's bad press and it's rude. I wouldn't
complain if my game were in there, but I'd object if Hajo's game was.

If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive developers. I
think it would only be fair for a tribute site like this to have a
section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the most famous
vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game, Genrogue and Amy Wang's
three day team effort) until their eventual, first public release ;)

--
michaelblackney at hotmail dot com
http://aburatan.sourceforge.net/
Latest version 0.95 2-5-4


Glen Wheeler

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 11:21:44 PM6/28/04
to

"Hansjoerg Malthaner" <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote in message
news:2kadbhF...@uni-berlin.de...

I am a little worried...in my group of friends, I have a barebones
playable version. But I am not ready to show the outside world, for even
with my very small sample there were a few people who did not understand
that so many features are missing.
I have been developing for 6 months, 6 and a half months actually.
Currently I have a random *terrain* generator (proudest achievement...),
elevations, facings, basic combat. Scrolling, look mode, alot of UI
functions. But it's not a real game.
And nothing has been released, except for one screenshot. I'll be happy
to release design documentation and screenshots...but I really don't feel
comfortable releasing something which is not even a shadow of what it will
become.
So I guess I qualify under newbie hot air/vapourware. This seems a little
harsh...I am not developing vapourware :(. I am a newbie though...
Bleh.

--
Glen
L:Pyt E+++ T-- R+ P+++ D+ G+ F:*band !RL RLA-
W:AF Q+++ AI++ GFX++ SFX-- RN++++ PO--- !Hp Re-- S+


Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 28, 2004, 11:28:46 PM6/28/04
to
Mike Blackney wrote:
> "Jeff Lait" <torespon...@hotmail.com> communicated:

>> I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.
>
> Umm. Because the games are alive? We all know what born dead means
> and it's not merely humbling - it's bad press and it's rude. I
> wouldn't complain if my game were in there, but I'd object if Hajo's
> game was.
>
> If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive developers.
> I think it would only be fair for a tribute site like this to have a
> section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the most famous
> vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game, Genrogue and Amy
> Wang's three day team effort) until their eventual, first public
> release ;)

Eckhem! I should get offended by this one ;). Mainly because you're putting
my game into one bag with ShockFrost. But I'm only midly annoyed. The fact
that I'm not releasing test versions as soon as I get an @ crawling over the
map and bashing a few "p"-s doesn't make my game vapourware, nor doesn't it
make it any worse then any other project up to date. And contrary to the
other two projects you've put GenRogue in with, GenRogue is under constant
development since almost 6 years (sic!) (depending on what kind of criterium
you take it may be considered even 11 years). It's not my fauls that I don't
want to garbage the net with additional non-playable roguelike binaries
(like, flame me, you and many others do ;) ). If I decide that GenRogue's
going beta, then I'll release a non-playable game (and it's fine, if you do
that for such a reason, as you probably do)... But I don't think this GR
rewrite is anyware near beta release.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 2:44:45 AM6/29/04
to
Gerry Quinn schrieb:

> In article <2kadbhF...@uni-berlin.de>,
> hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de says...
>
>>Projects of more than 6 months age could be judged this way:
>>
>>- new release during last 6 months? -> alive
>>- new release during last 6-12 months? -> crawling
>>- no release since 12 months? -> sleeping
>>- no release since 24 months? -> almost dead
>>- no release since 36 months? -> no hope anymore/waiting to be revived
>
> What about projects that are *finished*. Not everybody believes in
> continually releasing beta versions of software.

Just label it "finished". The only problem might be to conatct the
author, becuase it's his decision to call it finished or incomplete.
(Finished = includes everything that the author wants to have in there)

> - Gerry Quinn

c.u.
Hajo

Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 2:54:18 AM6/29/04
to
Jeff Lait schrieb:

> A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
> graveyard itself:
>
> "In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
> games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
> about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
> previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
> is just a fake toy for children."
>
> I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.

I object to the "As you see they didn't learn anything from
previously dead".

I took a god look at existing and failed projects, and I don't intend to
repeat the old mistakes. Saying I didn't learn anything from existing
projects and my participation in RGRD is IMO a slight insult.

I also object "you have no chance to survive". There is a chance, two
actually. (1) Make your project small enough so that you can finish it
quickly. (2) Have enough endurance to work on your project to the end,
even if it's years.

I plan for (2).

I've worked 7 years on Simutrans. I have the endurance to go long
distances, I can do it. Thus Jakubs classification hurts me, and I
object to put H-World/The Jungle in there!

If he put's Iso-Angband in there, I'll not object so much because there
indeed is only little hope that it will be finished some day. OTOH I
revived the project two times after a 12 month hibernation, so noone can
really say if it will or won't get somewhere some day ... instead of
"born dead" I'd prefer the classification "sleeping" or "put on halt".

c.u.
Hajo

Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 3:05:16 AM6/29/04
to
Glen Wheeler schrieb:

So you are building prototypes. Demos of the different functionality and
building blocks.

IMO this is enough to put the project into the "prototyping" state.

Some people come here and telled lies about the state of their projects.
Usually we found that out quite quickly, or at least had strong doubts
in their words. In your case - announcing you want to do something,
later on telling about some problems, and that you'll try it some other
way - the story sounds perfectly reasonable. IMO there is no doubt if
you say you have protoytpes of several of the games building blocks or
even a small demo of it all.

> And nothing has been released, except for one screenshot. I'll be happy
> to release design documentation and screenshots...but I really don't feel
> comfortable releasing something which is not even a shadow of what it will
> become.

No worries. I didn't say, the things need to be released, I said they
need to exist. Of course this is hard to tell if they are not released,
but OTOH we just need to trust the other memebers of this group
somehwat, otherwise we'll never get somewhere.

> So I guess I qualify under newbie hot air/vapourware. This seems a little
> harsh...I am not developing vapourware :(. I am a newbie though...
> Bleh.

I'd say it qualifies under "prototyping".

c.u.
Hajo

Jeff Lait

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 5:04:06 AM6/29/04
to
"Mike Blackney" <michael...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<40e0...@news.alphalink.com.au>...

> "Jeff Lait" <torespon...@hotmail.com> communicated:
> >
> > The category "Born Dead" is intentionally deprecatory. The point was
> > to avoid copx's categorization of projects based on how successful
> > they would be, but to instead classify all projects as doomed. This
> > places some sense of perspective and humility on roguelike authors.
>
> Fair enough for you to say: your game's not on there! Noted, neither is
> mine... *sob*

I'd join you in sobbing. I'd rather my game was in there, and hope
one day to achieve that status.

> > A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
> > graveyard itself:
> >
> > "In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
> > games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
> > about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
> > previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
> > is just a fake toy for children."
> >
> > I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.
>
> Umm. Because the games are alive?

Where does that description contradict that? The phrase "Born Dead
games try to _survive_." makes it clear that "Born Dead" in this
context does not mean actually dead. It is, I believe, an intentional
reference to copx's original classification. Jakub would apply it to
all roguelikes equally, as all are doomed. (And they are. Heat death
of the universe will get them if nothing else.)

> We all know what born dead means and
> it's not merely humbling - it's bad press and it's rude. I wouldn't
> complain if my game were in there, but I'd object if Hajo's game was.

I'd be happy if my game were in there.

I really don't understand the excessive sensitivity on this issue.
It's a graveyard! Look at the text! The whole site is about how
every roguelike ends up dead. I could understand people's concerns if
he had a "In Development" and "Born Dead" section. His classification
would thus be an implicit criticism of the roguelike. But, as built,
all growing roguelikes get the same equal treatment. It is thus
foolish to think that his placement of Dweller in the "Born Dead"
section means that he considers it the same as any 2-week project by
an overzealous newbie.

From the site:
"Dweller - tha Java J2ME roguelike! Yes, you can play a rougelike game
on your cell phone! The game is still in development, but author
update it often by suggestions of players. Download from the website,
upload to your phone and enjoy! :)"

That doesn't sound like a description of a doomed project.

There seems to be this feeling that some random person will visit the
graveyard and conclude that Gearhead is not worth playing as it is
listed under "Born Dead". I really can't imagine that happening.

> If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive developers. I
> think it would only be fair for a tribute site like this to have a
> section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the most famous
> vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game, Genrogue and Amy Wang's
> three day team effort) until their eventual, first public release ;)

Why should they get any more press? Pure vaporware already consumes
the majority of interest on this newsgroup. Those examples deserve no
mention on a tribute site to those who actually produced something!
The Born Dead section is good as it only contains things which have
released forms, and things which are being developed. Roguelikes with
no releases should not be placed there. Things no longer developed
will end up as Zombies or Graves. Born Dead will thus contain the
active roguelikes of all types. Any visitor will thus be swiftly
disabused of the notion that they are only the inferior roguelikes (if
they somehow came to that opinion)
--
Jeff Lait
(POWDER: http://www.zincland.com/powder)

Jeff Lait

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 7:49:57 AM6/29/04
to
"Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> wrote in message news:<cbqnbr$sfq$1...@inews.gazeta.pl>...

> Mike Blackney wrote:
> > "Jeff Lait" <torespon...@hotmail.com> communicated:
> >> I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.
> >
> > Umm. Because the games are alive? We all know what born dead means

> > and it's not merely humbling - it's bad press and it's rude. I
> > wouldn't complain if my game were in there, but I'd object if Hajo's
> > game was.
> >
> > If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive developers.
> > I think it would only be fair for a tribute site like this to have a
> > section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the most famous
> > vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game, Genrogue and Amy
> > Wang's three day team effort) until their eventual, first public
> > release ;)
>
> Eckhem! I should get offended by this one ;). Mainly because you're putting
> my game into one bag with ShockFrost. But I'm only midly annoyed. The fact
> that I'm not releasing test versions as soon as I get an @ crawling over the
> map and bashing a few "p"-s doesn't make my game vapourware, nor doesn't it
> make it any worse then any other project up to date.

Vaporware is an elusive term. Obviously GenRogue can't become
vaporware until you say it won't ever be released. However, until
there is a public release, there is no difference to outside observers
between GenRogue and ShockFrost's project. *You* may know that there
is a huge difference. You should not, however, expect us to know that
there is a difference.

> And contrary to the
> other two projects you've put GenRogue in with, GenRogue is under constant
> development since almost 6 years (sic!) (depending on what kind of criterium
> you take it may be considered even 11 years). It's not my fauls that I don't
> want to garbage the net with additional non-playable roguelike binaries
> (like, flame me, you and many others do ;) ). If I decide that GenRogue's
> going beta, then I'll release a non-playable game (and it's fine, if you do
> that for such a reason, as you probably do)... But I don't think this GR
> rewrite is anyware near beta release.

Personally, I'd be concerned if after 6 years of development a game
was still not playable. But, it is your free time.

SZDev - Slash

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 8:17:21 AM6/29/04
to

"Hansjoerg Malthaner" <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> escribió en el
mensaje news:2kci0r...@uni-berlin.de...

I agree with Hajo, may be some people here will go to the website and
understand that it is just a way to "humble" the developers, but I didn't
see that intention when I got there, The "born-dead" definition in the websi
te suggest that no matter what the developer does, the game will not get
anywhere.

I know it is a graveyard, but then may be not all projects in development
have to be there!


--
Santiago Zapata

L:Java E++ T- R+ !P D+ G++ F:ADoM RL* RLA-
W:G Q++ AI+ GFX- SFX- RN++++ PO--- Hp- Re+ S+ c-- ?OS *KG


Jeff Lait

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 8:48:21 AM6/29/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote in message news:<2kci0r...@uni-berlin.de>...

> Jeff Lait schrieb:
>
> > A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
> > graveyard itself:
> >
> > "In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
> > games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
> > about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
> > previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
> > is just a fake toy for children."
> >
> > I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.
>
> I object to the "As you see they didn't learn anything from
> previously dead".

You are taking this description as a personal judgement of your game.
It isn't. It is flavour text to describe the category. The category
is actively developed roguelikes. Why do you object to being
classified as still actively developed? H-World isn't finished. It
hasn't been abandoned for a year (a Zombie). And it hasn't died.
That leaves only one category.

> I also object "you have no chance to survive". There is a chance, two
> actually. (1) Make your project small enough so that you can finish it
> quickly. (2) Have enough endurance to work on your project to the end,
> even if it's years.

From the viewpoint of the CryptKeeper, we all have no chance to
survive. Everyone ends up in the graveyard. Some sooner. Some
later. But the CryptKeeper *knows*: We are all Born Dead!

> I plan for (2).
>
> I've worked 7 years on Simutrans. I have the endurance to go long
> distances, I can do it. Thus Jakubs classification hurts me, and I
> object to put H-World/The Jungle in there!

Jakub has classified all roguelikes into four categories:
Graves: Dead
Zombies: No maintainer, or long silent.
Born Deads: Currently being developed.
Hall of Fame: Finished. (Note: DungeonMonkey should be added here)

As such, I do not see why you'd object to being classified as still
being developed?

> If he put's Iso-Angband in there, I'll not object so much because there
> indeed is only little hope that it will be finished some day. OTOH I
> revived the project two times after a 12 month hibernation, so noone can
> really say if it will or won't get somewhere some day ... instead of
> "born dead" I'd prefer the classification "sleeping" or "put on halt".

"Sleeping" or "put on halt" are the Zombie roguelikes. Thus, he'd put
IsoAngband as a zombie if that is the right status.
--
Jeff Lait
(POWDER: http://www.zincland.com/powder)

Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 9:13:58 AM6/29/04
to
Jeff Lait schrieb:

> Hansjoerg Malthaner <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote in message news:<2kci0r...@uni-berlin.de>...
>
>>Jeff Lait schrieb:
>>
>>
>>>A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
>>>graveyard itself:
>>>
>>>"In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
>>>games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
>>>about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
>>>previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
>>>is just a fake toy for children."
>>>
>>>I really don't see what there is to object to in that description.
>>
>>I object to the "As you see they didn't learn anything from
>>previously dead".
>
> You are taking this description as a personal judgement of your game.
> It isn't. It is flavour text to describe the category.

I think the phrase is rather misleading then. It really says the author
is too stupid to learn from previous failed projects.

If that's flavour, I don't like that flavour. In my ears this is an insult.

> The category
> is actively developed roguelikes.

Unfortunately, this is stated nowhere. It may be so in your mind, but
not in the text of the website :(

Visitors only see the text, and judge the project from the description.
I'm very afraid that this will shed a bad light on my project, and
people could think I'm a stupid person not able to learn and repeating
the old mistakes all over -> thus my projects must fail.

I strongly hope this is not the case, and therfore I feel very
uncomfortable in that category.

> Why do you object to being
> classified as still actively developed?

Because the classification description on the website is "doomed to
fail" not "actively developed".

IMO "born dead" is pretty harsh already. I see projects that are born
dead. That don't have a chance to get off the ground. But H-World isn't
one of those. It's already stumbling and on the verge to take off and fly.

> H-World isn't finished. It
> hasn't been abandoned for a year (a Zombie). And it hasn't died.
> That leaves only one category.

But this category shoudl be labeled "living" or "being developed" and
not "born dead"!

Please, this is a bad joke. You weant to tell me that born dead is the
same as living. It isn't. Really. If it was the same I'd have two
brothers now, not one.

>>I also object "you have no chance to survive". There is a chance, two
>>actually. (1) Make your project small enough so that you can finish it
>>quickly. (2) Have enough endurance to work on your project to the end,
>>even if it's years.
>
> From the viewpoint of the CryptKeeper, we all have no chance to
> survive. Everyone ends up in the graveyard. Some sooner. Some
> later.

Well, I agree up to a point here. OTOH you have admitted that there are
"finished" projects, that implies successful projects. Dead IMO is
something else.

> But the CryptKeeper *knows*: We are all Born Dead!

But I do not agree here. Born dead isn't living at all. It's being dead
before even seeing the light of this world. No chance to live.

H-World was born well and still lives. It's not born dead and I strongly
object this classification.

>>I plan for (2).
>>
>>I've worked 7 years on Simutrans. I have the endurance to go long
>>distances, I can do it. Thus Jakubs classification hurts me, and I
>>object to put H-World/The Jungle in there!
>
> Jakub has classified all roguelikes into four categories:
> Graves: Dead
> Zombies: No maintainer, or long silent.
> Born Deads: Currently being developed.

This is rubbish. Born deads are projects that are misdesigned from the
start and therefore never get somehere.

There needs to be another category: living projects

If you want make a distiction "living" and "healthy" ... but born dead
means something else.

> Hall of Fame: Finished. (Note: DungeonMonkey should be added here)
>
> As such, I do not see why you'd object to being classified as still
> being developed?

Because a visitor of the website will not interpret "bron dead" as
"being developed" but "projects that never gats somehwere due to
mistakes of the develoepr/designer".

And I know for sure I don't want to see H-World in that category.

>>If he put's Iso-Angband in there, I'll not object so much because there
>>indeed is only little hope that it will be finished some day. OTOH I
>>revived the project two times after a 12 month hibernation, so noone can
>>really say if it will or won't get somewhere some day ... instead of
>>"born dead" I'd prefer the classification "sleeping" or "put on halt".
>
> "Sleeping" or "put on halt" are the Zombie roguelikes. Thus, he'd put
> IsoAngband as a zombie if that is the right status.

That's ok.

c.u.
Hajo

SZDev - Slash

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 10:16:25 AM6/29/04
to


"Hansjoerg Malthaner" <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> escribió en el

mensaje news:2kd88m...@uni-berlin.de...

I really don't see the joke, it is very confusing for any visitor (as for me
when I first got there)

> >>I also object "you have no chance to survive". There is a chance, two
> >>actually. (1) Make your project small enough so that you can finish it
> >>quickly. (2) Have enough endurance to work on your project to the end,
> >>even if it's years.
> >
> > From the viewpoint of the CryptKeeper, we all have no chance to
> > survive. Everyone ends up in the graveyard. Some sooner. Some
> > later.
>
> Well, I agree up to a point here. OTOH you have admitted that there are
> "finished" projects, that implies successful projects. Dead IMO is
> something else.
>
> > But the CryptKeeper *knows*: We are all Born Dead!
>
> But I do not agree here. Born dead isn't living at all. It's being dead
> before even seeing the light of this world. No chance to live.
>
> H-World was born well and still lives. It's not born dead and I strongly
> object this classification.
>

The fact that all software dies with the time doesn't mean it is born dead!

> >>I plan for (2).
> >>
> >>I've worked 7 years on Simutrans. I have the endurance to go long
> >>distances, I can do it. Thus Jakubs classification hurts me, and I
> >>object to put H-World/The Jungle in there!
> >
> > Jakub has classified all roguelikes into four categories:
> > Graves: Dead
> > Zombies: No maintainer, or long silent.
> > Born Deads: Currently being developed.
>
> This is rubbish. Born deads are projects that are misdesigned from the
> start and therefore never get somehere.
>
> There needs to be another category: living projects
>
> If you want make a distiction "living" and "healthy" ... but born dead
> means something else.
>

The thing is that it is a graveyard, not a collection of roguelikes, so I
think that your project must not be there as it is very very alive and
kicking.

> > Hall of Fame: Finished. (Note: DungeonMonkey should be added here)
> >
> > As such, I do not see why you'd object to being classified as still
> > being developed?
>
> Because a visitor of the website will not interpret "bron dead" as
> "being developed" but "projects that never gats somehwere due to
> mistakes of the develoepr/designer".
>
> And I know for sure I don't want to see H-World in that category.

Nor Dweller

>
> >>If he put's Iso-Angband in there, I'll not object so much because there
> >>indeed is only little hope that it will be finished some day. OTOH I
> >>revived the project two times after a 12 month hibernation, so noone can
> >>really say if it will or won't get somewhere some day ... instead of
> >>"born dead" I'd prefer the classification "sleeping" or "put on halt".
> >
> > "Sleeping" or "put on halt" are the Zombie roguelikes. Thus, he'd put
> > IsoAngband as a zombie if that is the right status.
>
> That's ok.
>
> c.u.
> Hajo

--

Adrien Beau

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 10:22:13 AM6/29/04
to
On mardi 29 Juin 2004 11:04, Jeff Lait wrote:
>
> There seems to be this feeling that some random person will
> visit the graveyard and conclude that Gearhead is not worth
> playing as it is listed under "Born Dead". I really can't
> imagine that happening.

When I first saw that Gearhead was considered to be born dead, I
thought that the site had not been updated in a long time and
that the site author did not know that the game was alive and
well. Then I read more of the site, and understood the weird
meaning he gives to the term "born dead". Still, the first
impression you get when visiting the site is *very* negative.

--
spam....@free.fr
You have my name and my hostname: you can mail me.
(Put a period between my first and last names).

Tormod Haugen

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 10:22:14 AM6/29/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner <hansjoerg...@nurfuerspam.de> wrote in message news:<2kci0r...@uni-berlin.de>...

> Jeff Lait schrieb:
>
> > A better definition of what Jakub means by born dead is on the
> > graveyard itself:
> >
> > "In our graveyard you can visit the Haunted House too, where Born Dead
> > games try to survive. The young ones are very optimistic, still think
> > about bright future. As you see they didn't learn anything from
> > previously dead: you have no chance to survive. Amulet Of Live Saving
> > is just a fake toy for children."
> >

I think people are talking past them each others here. I'll add to
this mess by posting my views.

I belive the term meant more like "Born to die" than "Born Dead". I
can see the humor intended with this "graveyard", but probably only
because I have no game to be placed here.

As I see it, this is a pessimistic themed site. Everything are going
to die, if not before the sun goes nova. Thus there are a limited
number of categories to place games in:

* Those still under development: "Born Dead" (not stillborn, but "born
to die sooner or later" Perhaps should be "Born to die" or "Still
Alive".
* Those seldomly maintained and not finished: "Zombies"
* Those not maintained any more and not finished: "Graves"
* Those finished, still maintained or not: "Hall of Fame".

Suggest adding:
"Lost Souls" for Vaporware and such.
Perhaps "Ascended" for those finished games still maintained?

Plus, add a disclaimer / "Read this note!" page stating nothing is
with ill intent, and the real descriptions of each category: "Born to
die" means Living and activly maintained.

Most trouble in this thread stems from communication trouble, not ill
will. Lay it to "rest" :)

Suggest categories "Graves" for dead projects, "Zombies" for those
that are seldom updated, "Lost Souls" for Vaporware, ideas etc. and
"Born to die" / "Still living" or something for those under
development. Keep the "Hall of Fame" , or perhaps "Ascended", for
those labeled finished?


[snip]

tormodh.

PS.
People posting in that "Re: VB Roguelikes?" thread:

SHUT UP! You are flaming each others over *browsers* and *newsreaders*
or whatever in a thread named "VB Roguelikes?". Some of you should
have better sense than feeding it. It being *plonked*, but the thread
lives on in others.

If you *HAVE* to continue, pleas prepend the topic with [OT] when
keeping the flames of WW3 alive. Thank You!

Oh, and my roguelike is almost a bit futher on after 1.5 years - but
now it is in Java, and programming at work keeps personal projects at
a low.

Guess it would fit as a lost soul, if it only had a name... ;)

Hope none are too offended by this first post in quite some time.
Thanks.

SZDev - Slash

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 11:27:01 AM6/29/04
to
"Tormod Haugen" <tor...@gmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:2cafad2e.0406...@posting.google.com...

Very very good idea

> Most trouble in this thread stems from communication trouble, not ill
> will. Lay it to "rest" :)
>
> Suggest categories "Graves" for dead projects, "Zombies" for those
> that are seldom updated, "Lost Souls" for Vaporware, ideas etc. and
> "Born to die" / "Still living" or something for those under
> development. Keep the "Hall of Fame" , or perhaps "Ascended", for
> those labeled finished?
>
>
> [snip]
>
> tormodh.
>
> PS.
> People posting in that "Re: VB Roguelikes?" thread:
>
> SHUT UP! You are flaming each others over *browsers* and *newsreaders*
> or whatever in a thread named "VB Roguelikes?". Some of you should
> have better sense than feeding it. It being *plonked*, but the thread
> lives on in others.
>
> If you *HAVE* to continue, pleas prepend the topic with [OT] when
> keeping the flames of WW3 alive. Thank You!

WHOA!! I tought nobody else had noticed them!!! I'm SICK of that thread!!!!

####
@
####
@
@@@@@

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@


>
> Oh, and my roguelike is almost a bit futher on after 1.5 years - but
> now it is in Java, and programming at work keeps personal projects at
> a low.
>
> Guess it would fit as a lost soul, if it only had a name... ;)
>
> Hope none are too offended by this first post in quite some time.
> Thanks.

--

Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 1:00:00 PM6/29/04
to
Jeff Lait wrote:
> "Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> wrote in message
> news:<cbqnbr$sfq$1...@inews.gazeta.pl>...
>> Mike Blackney wrote:
>>> "Jeff Lait" <torespon...@hotmail.com> communicated:
>>> If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive
>>> developers. I think it would only be fair for a tribute site like
>>> this to have a section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the
>>> most famous vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game,
>>> Genrogue and Amy Wang's three day team effort) until their
>>> eventual, first public release ;)
>>
>> Eckhem! I should get offended by this one ;). Mainly because you're
>> putting my game into one bag with ShockFrost. But I'm only midly
>> annoyed. The fact that I'm not releasing test versions as soon as I
>> get an @ crawling over the map and bashing a few "p"-s doesn't make
>> my game vapourware, nor doesn't it make it any worse then any other
>> project up to date.
>
> Vaporware is an elusive term.

It surely is.

> Obviously GenRogue can't become
> vaporware until you say it won't ever be released.

That would mean I wasted a helluva lot of time. Nah, I'm too stubborn to
ever give up on it ;).

> However, until
> there is a public release, there is no difference to outside observers
> between GenRogue and ShockFrost's project.

There are:
a) GenRogue had an active website for a long time (and it will have one
again in the next month or so)
b) GenRogue had published screenshots (and that proves that there is work on
it, and that it was advanced -- as far as if you think I fabricated them,
but ya wouldn't think such a bad thing would ya?)
c) GenRogue had an active development diary (as above)
d) GenRogue has a detailed background description
e) The author of GenRogue is quite active in the community since 4-5 years
or so, spending his time on posting, creating general roguelike websites,
helping others with their roguelikes etc -- which proves that he _may_ be
able to have the will to create one.
f) The author of GenRogue created another roguelike and published it (okay,
okay, this one's not valid... yet).
g) The author of GenRogue doesn't promise immidate effects.
h) On the above mentioned webpage there *were* a few downloads (although
realy unipressive) of realy old GenRogue rewrites.
i) The author of GenRogue understands the complexity of such a project and
knows it can not be finished in one semester ;).

> You should not, however, expect us to know that
> there is a difference.

I somehow do, see above ;).

> Personally, I'd be concerned if after 6 years of development a game
> was still not playable. But, it is your free time.

*sigh* Above, and especialy here you *do* have a couple of valid thoughts,
though. There are many reasons while the game is still under developement.
The most serious one is probably my perfectionism. I can't stand working on
my own code (luckily this doesn't apply to other's codes or else I would be
doomed as a programmer ^_^) if I know that something in the underlying code
structure could be done better (and I get flashes of new ideas every three
months or so). This is directly applied to my second problem -- I learned
Pascal (and FreePascal since the 7th rewrite) during my programming on
GenRogue. That applies to learning programming in general too. I set myself
very high demands from the game, and I know that if it won't have a stable
and clear codebase, I will never stand a chance on achieving that. The way
it looked from one rewrite to another (I can't recall a few, since detailed
logging was started about rewrite 4).:

1. _Amber_: Turbo Pascal. No high-memory, using no pointers, plain
procedural style, everything hard-coded. All maps fixed. Constant size
inventory, awful item and monster code, etc. The game was called Amber, and
achieved a state of "one dungeon, half a city, and a few dialogs.
Nevertheless I got flamed by Archibald (after he saw it) that instead of
constant rewriting of the code I should continue that game ;)
2. _WoS(WOS)_: Added a nicer procedural style only.
3. _WoS2(Shadow)_: The idea for the game finaly cristalized in my mind. I
learned pointers, and dungeon generation. I learned about keeping thingies
in datafiles, and true LOS.
4. _WoS3(WoS2)_: This one was even playable. I learned how to use XMS in
Pascal. It had a single dungeon and a town, items, monsters, character
generation and even an ending ;).
5. _GenRogue(Alpha)_: Decided to generalize my game, and keep as much data
outside of the code as possible. Learned better about dungeon generation.
This was the first rewrite that had an overland map.
6. _GenRogue(Omega)_: Learned about objects, which completely changed my way
of thinking.
7. _GenRogue(GRFREE)_: Dicovered FreePascal! FreePascal was so great, that I
had to dedicate it a full rewrite! Discovered the power of inheritance.
8. _GenRogue(GVFREE)_: Decided to keep my tools outside GenRogue - based
GenRogue on my newly created Valkyrie library. And the object hierarchy form
the previous base sucked in my opinion. Discovered scripting.
9. _GenRogue(GVFREE2)_: Discovered Classes. (as a note, there is a
difference between classes and objects in FP. Objects are an old TP
construct, Classes resemble more the classes in C++) Redesigned the whole
system. The primal Node idea first discovered. Discovered the value of
Design Documents.
10. _GenRogue(Reloaded)_: Discovered many, many new things about programming
and FPC. Fleshed out the whole Node/Event system, Scripting system, Debug
system, etc. _Understanded_ value of Design Documents.
11. _GenRogue(Reactivated)_ (*NOW*): Discovered even more things ;).
Redesigned the whole system, so it will support all the features I plan.
Made a detailed DesignDoc. New redesigned Valkyrie library. Moreover first
rewrite designed to be portable (and tested on Linux).

*phew*... Kheh, It's even more then I though it was... But still this time
wasn't wasted. I learned a lot -- about roguelike programming, cRPG
programming, AI, porting, computer architecture, computer languages,
scripting, general programming, data structures, etc -- the list is long.
This is knowledge that I will use in my life, so the time isn't lost
anyway...

One of these days, I'll put all the rewrites on a website, for others to
download and see the hard process of creating a roguelike, and the migration
from a wannabe, to a full fledged programmer ;).

But Hajo (or someone else) was right when he wrote me : "STOP REWRITING
GENROGUE!!!". I think it's high time to stick with this rewrite, even if it
means my perfectionist side will have to suffer.

I hope this too-long-egocentric post has somehow familiarized you with
GenRogue's history, and somehow excuses at least a little bit my eternal
rewriting.

Comments are welcome.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


SC Skipsey

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 1:14:48 PM6/29/04
to
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Adrien Beau wrote:

> When I first saw that Gearhead was considered to be born dead, I
> thought that the site had not been updated in a long time and
> that the site author did not know that the game was alive and
> well. Then I read more of the site, and understood the weird
> meaning he gives to the term "born dead". Still, the first
> impression you get when visiting the site is *very* negative.
>
>

I agree completely with this comment. (Yes, that's almost an AOLism...)

I think the listing of GearHead as "Born Dead" is one reason why I still
haven't got around to playing it (and, in fact, was surprised to see new
versions of it being posted on r.g.r.misc).
That listing definitely needs changing to something else, like "Born to
Die", or "Alive, for the moment".

Paul Pekkarinen

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 2:13:27 PM6/29/04
to
"Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> wrote in message
> It's not my fauls that I don't
> want to garbage the net with additional non-playable roguelike binaries
> (like, flame me, you and many others do ;) ).

It may be wise not to release a non-playable versions.. but some of
us cannot wait to show what they are creating. I'm one of them:)

Ilya Bely

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 2:30:29 PM6/29/04
to
Hi there!

I was offline for a long time, but I were spended last weeks evenings
by reading all posts here for the monthes I was missing.


Kornel Kisielewicz wrote in message <cbs6r4$39p$1...@inews.gazeta.pl>:

Kornel, had you received e-mails from me? I still hadn't heard anything
from you.


> f) The author of GenRogue created another roguelike and published it (okay,
> okay, this one's not valid... yet).

Several people (including me) saw it.

Does the DRL lies outside of the tree? Some messages was indicating use
of the valkyrie library.

I recall you also had mentioned something called Downfall (or Dragonfall or
D-whatever-fall)?


--
May your code work forever and never have a bug.
At your service, Ilya Bely

Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 5:04:35 PM6/29/04
to
Ilya Bely wrote:
> Kornel, had you received e-mails from me? I still hadn't heard
> anything from you.

I just finished my exams :-). I hadn't yet time to answer to all the
e-mails, I will, but on Monday (cause tomorrow I'm going out-of-town).

>> f) The author of GenRogue created another roguelike and published it
>> (okay, okay, this one's not valid... yet).
>
> Several people (including me) saw it.

Yeah, I know ;).

<snip>


>> 11. _GenRogue(Reactivated)_ (*NOW*): Discovered even more things ;).
>> Redesigned the whole system, so it will support all the features I
>> plan. Made a detailed DesignDoc. New redesigned Valkyrie library.
>> Moreover first rewrite designed to be portable (and tested on Linux).
>>
> Does the DRL lies outside of the tree? Some messages was indicating
> use of the valkyrie library.
> I recall you also had mentioned something called Downfall (or
> Dragonfall or D-whatever-fall)?

It uses the old Valkyrie (the unfortunately unportable one). But it's based
on the DownFall sourcecode. DownFall was ment to be a simple roguelike
engine, completely seperate from the GR line. It succeded at least at the
task of being DRL's base. Similary to DRL, DownFall had simplicity in
mind -- one-item-per-square, screen-size maps, fixed inventory size, etc.
DownFall was never ment to be a roguelike (although on one point it almost
became one... -- I had a funky idea of sub-terran wars between races).

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 5:06:47 PM6/29/04
to

I don't criticize you :). I just tell that one shouldn't be criticized for
doing the opposite ;).

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Mike Blackney

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 2:54:04 AM6/29/04
to
"Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> communicated:

> Mike Blackney wrote:
> >
> > If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive
> > developers.
> > I think it would only be fair for a tribute site like this to have a
> > section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the most famous
> > vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game, Genrogue and Amy
> > Wang's three day team effort) until their eventual, first public
> > release ;)
>
> Eckhem! I should get offended by this one ;). Mainly because you're
> putting my game into one bag with ShockFrost. But I'm only midly
> annoyed. The fact that I'm not releasing test versions as soon as I
> get an @ crawling over the map and bashing a few "p"-s doesn't make
> my game vapourware, nor doesn't it make it any worse then any other
> project up to date. And contrary to the other two projects you've put
> GenRogue in with, GenRogue is under constant development since almost
> 6 years (sic!) (depending on what kind of criterium you take it may
> be considered even 11 years).

Come on, Kornel. 11 years and no binary? And it's not vapourware?

Kidding. :)

Seriously, my point is that solid and promising projects like
H-World/The Jungle shouldn't be in the graveyard; but if they are,
projects that have a lot of huff and very little puff should also get
their own. Based on this criteria, Hajo should only enter the graveyard
after all the other smaller and less active projects, including yours
and mine.

Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 7:08:56 PM6/29/04
to
Mike Blackney wrote:
> "Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> communicated:
>> Mike Blackney wrote:
>>>
>>> If we want to humble anyone it should be the unproductive
>>> developers.
>>> I think it would only be fair for a tribute site like this to have a
>>> section 'Spirits'. Put in a small desc of all the most famous
>>> vapourware games (e.g. Shockie's medallion game, Genrogue and Amy
>>> Wang's three day team effort) until their eventual, first public
>>> release ;)
>>
>> Eckhem! I should get offended by this one ;). Mainly because you're
>> putting my game into one bag with ShockFrost. But I'm only midly
>> annoyed. The fact that I'm not releasing test versions as soon as I
>> get an @ crawling over the map and bashing a few "p"-s doesn't make
>> my game vapourware, nor doesn't it make it any worse then any other
>> project up to date. And contrary to the other two projects you've put
>> GenRogue in with, GenRogue is under constant development since almost
>> 6 years (sic!) (depending on what kind of criterium you take it may
>> be considered even 11 years).
>
> Come on, Kornel. 11 years and no binary? And it's not vapourware?

Nope. :)

And seriuosly though, read the GenRogue thread below for explanations.

> Seriously, my point is that solid and promising projects like
> H-World/The Jungle shouldn't be in the graveyard; but if they are,
> projects that have a lot of huff and very little puff should also get
> their own. Based on this criteria, Hajo should only enter the
> graveyard after all the other smaller and less active projects,
> including yours and mine.

The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike projects. I
think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's just a form of a
Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means -- the project is under
development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying "Ah, nobody of us will finish
anything anyway ;)".

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Diwil

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 7:20:23 PM6/29/04
to
> The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike projects. I
> think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's just a form of a
> Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means -- the project is under
> development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying "Ah, nobody of us will finish
> anything anyway ;)".

But perhaps it would be good to state that it's a joke - the first time I
went to the site myself, I didn't download any of the Born Deads - the name
and the category decription got me the impression that they plain suck and
they were not worth the creation in the first place.

Vaporware and such would be good for the Born Dead, but the actively
maintained and such? A new category or a change of category name /
description would be in place, since people who aren't really familiar with
the inside jokes you guys pull off will surely get the wrong impression, and
that's just bad promotion for the games. If my game would be under the
category (hell, so far it's vaporware on the public eye but maybe someday?)
I'd request taking it off the site entirely, since I'd rather have no bad
promotion than no promotion at all, but that's just me.

- Claus "Diwil" Kruuskopf


Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 7:43:15 PM6/29/04
to
Diwil wrote:
>> The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike
>> projects. I think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's
>> just a form of a Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means
>> -- the project is under development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying
>> "Ah, nobody of us will finish anything anyway ;)".
>
> But perhaps it would be good to state that it's a joke

Stating that a joke is a joke usualy destroys the joke ;).

> I'd request taking it off the site
> entirely, since I'd rather have no bad promotion than no promotion at
> all, but that's just me.

Not me ;). Even if GR would be 1.0.0 I would rather see it in the Born Dead
category than in Hall of Fame ;)

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Diwil

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 7:50:11 PM6/29/04
to
> >> The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike
> >> projects. I think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's
> >> just a form of a Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means
> >> -- the project is under development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying
> >> "Ah, nobody of us will finish anything anyway ;)".
> >
> > But perhaps it would be good to state that it's a joke
>
> Stating that a joke is a joke usualy destroys the joke ;).

But would you consider using an inside joke to describe a game's quality to
be good practice for a public website? It'd be understandable if the site
wouldn't be in general knowledge and accessed by many "outsiders", but the
facts speak that many have misunderstood the category's description.

Is it their fault they've done so? Perhaps, if they're to blame not knowing
it's actually a joke, but the end result is still the same, no matter who
gets blamed: the description states the games are of poor quality, badly
programmed and so-on. That category's bad promotion all the way.

> > I'd request taking it off the site
> > entirely, since I'd rather have no bad promotion than no promotion at
> > all, but that's just me.
>
> Not me ;). Even if GR would be 1.0.0 I would rather see it in the Born
Dead
> category than in Hall of Fame ;)

Dont misunderstand when I say this, but you're pretty weird. ;)

- Claus "Diwil" Kruuskopf


Kornel Kisielewicz

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 8:20:43 PM6/29/04
to
Diwil wrote:
>>>> The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike
>>>> projects. I think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's
>>>> just a form of a Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means
>>>> -- the project is under development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying
>>>> "Ah, nobody of us will finish anything anyway ;)".
>>>
>>> But perhaps it would be good to state that it's a joke
>>
>> Stating that a joke is a joke usualy destroys the joke ;).
>
> But would you consider using an inside joke to describe a game's
> quality to be good practice for a public website?

I realy love the idea of the Graveyard, so the answer is ... Yes. One of the
greatest virtues a human being can achieve is the ability to laugh about
himself, and self-criticize.

> It'd be
> understandable if the site wouldn't be in general knowledge and
> accessed by many "outsiders", but the facts speak that many have
> misunderstood the category's description.

I wonder weather Graveyard isn't just an inside site of the RLDev society.
If this would be the fact, then most criticizm it now undergoes would be
silly ;).

>> Not me ;). Even if GR would be 1.0.0 I would rather see it in the
>> Born Dead category than in Hall of Fame ;)
>
> Dont misunderstand when I say this, but you're pretty weird. ;)

*giggles*
Well thank you for the compliment :)

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz


Jeff Lait

unread,
Jun 29, 2004, 9:02:24 PM6/29/04
to
tor...@gmail.com (Tormod Haugen) wrote in message news:<2cafad2e.0406...@posting.google.com>...

>
> I belive the term meant more like "Born to die" than "Born Dead". I
> can see the humor intended with this "graveyard", but probably only
> because I have no game to be placed here.

I think the "Born to Die" would clarify a lot of the ill feelings? At
least then it is not in the past tense.

> * Those seldomly maintained and not finished: "Zombies"
> * Those not maintained any more and not finished: "Graves"
> * Those finished, still maintained or not: "Hall of Fame".
>
> Suggest adding:
> "Lost Souls" for Vaporware and such.

I disagree. Vaporware should never get to the site in the first
place.

> Plus, add a disclaimer / "Read this note!" page stating nothing is
> with ill intent, and the real descriptions of each category: "Born to
> die" means Living and activly maintained.

Would that suffice?

My concern is that this is reminding me "Why we can't have nice
things." It is very important that developing roguelikes be in the
graveyard. That way, they can be properly moved to Zombie or Dead
status as required. Most roguelike development projects don't have
clear ends, but just trail off into the nether. The goal of this site
is sto not lose those projects. Thus, all current projects should be
listed.

The theme of the site makes the dark, hopeless, nature of description
appropriate.

> Most trouble in this thread stems from communication trouble, not ill
> will. Lay it to "rest" :)

Ow....
--

R Dan Henry

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 12:37:42 AM6/30/04
to
On 29 Jun 2004 02:04:06 -0700, in a fit of madness
torespon...@hotmail.com (Jeff Lait) declared:

>I really don't understand the excessive sensitivity on this issue.
>It's a graveyard! Look at the text! The whole site is about how
>every roguelike ends up dead. I could understand people's concerns if
>he had a "In Development" and "Born Dead" section. His classification
>would thus be an implicit criticism of the roguelike. But, as built,
>all growing roguelikes get the same equal treatment. It is thus
>foolish to think that his placement of Dweller in the "Born Dead"
>section means that he considers it the same as any 2-week project by
>an overzealous newbie.

It might be clear that this was supposed to be a universally applicable
joke, rather than a mocking celebration of failure if ADOM, Angband,
NetHack, and Crawl were among the "Born Dead". When the clearly
successful games aren't included, it does not appear to be an "all games
are doomed" joke, but a graveyard of dead roguelikes just as it appears.

>From the site:
>"Dweller - tha Java J2ME roguelike! Yes, you can play a rougelike game
>on your cell phone! The game is still in development, but author
>update it often by suggestions of players. Download from the website,
>upload to your phone and enjoy! :)"
>
>That doesn't sound like a description of a doomed project.
>
>There seems to be this feeling that some random person will visit the
>graveyard and conclude that Gearhead is not worth playing as it is
>listed under "Born Dead". I really can't imagine that happening.

Most people won't read carefully descriptions of games that are
presented as unplayable in the first place. The presentation needs to
signal that it is a joke early or many won't get into it enough to
recognize that the site is not intended to pan these games.

Furthermore, something like:

:Name of corpse: Dweller
:Died: 20.06.2004
:Grown to: 0.5.622

A "Died" listing rather strongly implies that development *ended* then.
There is no indication at all that anything other than this natural
reading is meant.

Also, Dweller gets called "rougelike" in the description.

This sentence:
:The game is still in development, but author update it often by suggestions of players.
strongly suggests to me that the owner of this website does not have
sufficient proficiency in English to carry off the intended joke, which
requires a deft touch. Without full fluency in the language you are
using, it is very hard to avoid being insulting with this sort of joke.

To be sure, if the complete site is read, one will notice one or two
references to current development, but it is too much to assume that
someone will do that when it appears that these are discarded games.

--
R. Dan Henry
danh...@inreach.com
They can have my ASCII graphics when they pry them
from my cold dead (c) and (d) slots.

R Dan Henry

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 12:37:45 AM6/30/04
to
On 29 Jun 2004 05:48:21 -0700, in a fit of madness
torespon...@hotmail.com (Jeff Lait) declared:

>"Sleeping" or "put on halt" are the Zombie roguelikes. Thus, he'd put


>IsoAngband as a zombie if that is the right status.

Which doesn't make sense. "Born dead" implies never progressing beyond
the initial impulse. "Zombies", however, are the dead that are still
moving. If any category name suggests it is still making slow, shuffling
and pointless progress (the only kind if one is taking the pessimistic
view), then it is the Zombies. Zombies may be dead, but they act like
they don't know it. Really, probably the best metaphor for the intended
joke.

Since Zombie implies still moving, I think it should take the current
"Born Dead" slot. I'm unclear what the purpose of the current "Zombie"
category is, anyway. These are no longer developed games that are in the
Grave, aren't they?

R Dan Henry

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 1:59:01 AM6/30/04
to
Okay, one plus for the Roguelike Graveyard. I found out about NonStop.
When I read the book, I thought, "This would be a good model for
creating a SF roguelike setting."

Hansjoerg Malthaner

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 3:13:43 AM6/30/04
to
Kornel Kisielewicz schrieb:

> Mike Blackney wrote:
>
>>"Kornel Kisielewicz" <charon...@magma-net.pl> communicated:

>>Seriously, my point is that solid and promising projects like


>>H-World/The Jungle shouldn't be in the graveyard; but if they are,
>>projects that have a lot of huff and very little puff should also get
>>their own. Based on this criteria, Hajo should only enter the
>>graveyard after all the other smaller and less active projects,
>>including yours and mine.
>
> The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike projects. I
> think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's just a form of a
> Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means -- the project is under
> development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying "Ah, nobody of us will finish
> anything anyway ;)".

The website gives no hints that it is a joke. It looks quite serious.
IMO it is very damaging for projet to be put there because it sheds a
bad light on the author and the project, given the current wording of
the text there.

Jakub shoudl at least ask the authors if they wnat to be part of his
joke. IMO new project have a hard life anyways. No need to make it
harder by damaging their reputation.

Given the current wording of the sites text, I will not allow Jakub to
put H-World there.

I agree I don't have a well developed sense of humor. But this "joke"
escapes me completely.

> regards,
> Kornel Kisielewicz

c.u.
Hajo

Jakub Debski

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 5:25:19 AM6/30/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:
>> Why do you object to being
>> classified as still actively developed?
>
> Because the classification description on the website is "doomed to
> fail" not "actively developed".
>> From the viewpoint of the CryptKeeper, we all have no chance to
>> survive. Everyone ends up in the graveyard. Some sooner. Some
>> later.
>
> Well, I agree up to a point here. OTOH you have admitted that there
> are "finished" projects, that implies successful projects. Dead IMO is
> something else.

Well... this is a *graveyard*. There are no place for living creatures...
Even completed projects are just in the "hall of fame" - place that is
usually to honor valuable dead...
I put there only less-known finnished roguelike games, or very old ones.
There won't be ADOM, NetHack, Crawl or *bands...
The reason for existence of the website is to inform about roguelikes that
are, were and have been abandoned. I see no reason to inform about games
that are very popular already.

I'm just supprised that so many people are offended...
The website is a joke, or - in other words - should sounds funny especially
for all roguelike developers. A kind of self criticism. In "Born Deads"
there is my game too. The game is in development, updates aren't frequent
last time, but I want to create really playable version before next
release... I'm sure all the time, that I'll finnish it one day,
but some many people said that before...
I don't want to insult anyone. I won't put H-World there, because it's the
*graveyard* and I won't change categories...

> But I do not agree here. Born dead isn't living at all. It's being
> dead
> before even seeing the light of this world. No chance to live.
>
> H-World was born well and still lives. It's not born dead and I
> strongly
> object this classification.

I had a picture in my head - a one from a B-movie horror - in a dark night,
on the graveyard, a group of young guys are trying to survive. They are
heroes of the movie, so they are sure, that they will survive. In the graves
are laying already dead heroes, who thought the same, and there are army of
zombies that are trying to catch survivors and take them to the graves or
eat their brains... The scene came to me after reading too much rgr.dev
group and the Polish one. People are completely sure that they will success
and become Thomas Biskup...
For me - it's kind of funny vision, maybe to much "Brain Dead" and "Evil
Dead" 1-3...? ;)

>> Jakub has classified all roguelikes into four categories:
>> Graves: Dead
>> Zombies: No maintainer, or long silent.
>> Born Deads: Currently being developed.

>> Hall of Fame: Finished. (Note: DungeonMonkey should be added here)

true

> This is rubbish. Born deads are projects that are misdesigned from the
> start and therefore never get somehere.

What's the difference if projects is abandoned at the beginning or after a
while?
I don't belive that most of projects that are currently developed will
survive.

> There needs to be another category: living projects

there is - born deads ;)

> If you want make a distiction "living" and "healthy" ... but born dead
> means something else.

Well, again, this a graveyard - there are no place for living.

regards,
Jakub, the CryptKeeper :)
--
"We're just toys in the hands of Xom"
www.xenocide.w.pl - SF roguelike in development
www.graveyard.uni.cc - visit Roguelike Graveyard
www.alamak0ta.republika.pl - my other projects

Gerry Quinn

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 5:36:10 AM6/30/04
to
In article <cbssfd$ca0$1...@inews.gazeta.pl>, charon...@magma-net.pl
says...

>
> The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike projects. I
> think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's just a form of a
> Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means -- the project is under
> development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying "Ah, nobody of us will finish
> anything anyway ;)".

Why not call it the "Roguelike Dungeon" and then different categories
can be put in different rooms.

I certainly think of 'born dead' as meaning 'all talk, overambitious
ideas, no development' i.e. the sort of thing we associate with projects
that will go no further than talk.

And some people do finish things.

- Gerry Quinn

Jakub Debski

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 5:44:59 AM6/30/04
to
Jakub Debski wrote:
> [...]

sorry, for grammar mistakes, I have to write very fast without checking - I
have to much work now... :/

regards,
Jakub

ABCGi

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 5:54:00 AM6/30/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:

It's clear to me that both Dweller and H-World are actually being worked
on currently, so I can't see how they can be defined as dead. In fact
they both look pretty promising and are fully 'completable' games.
Perhaps "revived" or "angelic" or "evangelical" but certainly not "born
dead"... Is it just a matter of an out of date web site?

--
ABCGi

ABCGi

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 5:54:20 AM6/30/04
to
Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:

It's clear to me that both Dweller and H-World are actually being worked

on currently, so I can't see how they can be defined as dead. In fact

they both look pretty promising and are 'completable' games. Perhaps

Mystic Triad

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 1:05:41 PM6/30/04
to

"Gerry Quinn" <ger...@DELETETHISindigo.ie> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b4c99e61...@news.indigo.ie...

> In article <cbssfd$ca0$1...@inews.gazeta.pl>, charon...@magma-net.pl
> says...
> >
> > The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike projects.
I
> > think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's just a form of a
> > Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means -- the project is
under
> > development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying "Ah, nobody of us will
finish
> > anything anyway ;)".
>
> Why not call it the "Roguelike Dungeon" and then different categories
> can be put in different rooms.

That's the best suggestion I've heard yet.

>
> I certainly think of 'born dead' as meaning 'all talk, overambitious
> ideas, no development' i.e. the sort of thing we associate with projects
> that will go no further than talk.
>
> And some people do finish things.
>

Personally I thought the "joke" was pretty insulting, and definitely
misleading to someone not in on it. The folks that are complaining are
certainly entitled to do so, and for Kornel to imply that they just "didn't
get it" only adds insult to injury. Perhaps it just wasn't funny.


Graeme Dice

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 6:55:08 PM6/30/04
to

I have to agree with you here. I was surprised when Gearhead and
H-World were added, since I knew that they were still being developed.


--
"Research! A mere excuse for idleness; it has never achieved,
and will never achieve any results of the slightest value."
-- Benjamin Jowett (1817-1893), British theologian.

ShockFrost

unread,
Jun 30, 2004, 11:18:15 PM6/30/04
to
doom_M...@hotmail.com (Mad Fly Thug) wrote in message news:<f43c27e8.04062...@posting.google.com>...
> ShockFrost

*swats back*
What meaningless hate.

ABCGi

unread,
Jul 1, 2004, 9:02:51 AM7/1/04
to
Diwil wrote:

>>The Roguelike Graveyard is just a form of promoting roguelike projects. I
>>think some of you people just didn't get the joke. It's just a form of a
>>Roguelike Projects website, where Born Dead means -- the project is under
>>development! It's a sarcasm, just as saying "Ah, nobody of us will finish
>>anything anyway ;)".
>
> But perhaps it would be good to state that it's a joke - the first time I
> went to the site myself, I didn't download any of the Born Deads - the name
> and the category decription got me the impression that they plain suck and
> they were not worth the creation in the first place.
>
> Vaporware and such would be good for the Born Dead, but the actively

No Vaporware never even gets that far. Successful Vaporware is never
released and certainly is never available for download off a web site!

> maintained and such? A new category or a change of category name /
> description would be in place, since people who aren't really familiar with
> the inside jokes you guys pull off will surely get the wrong impression, and
> that's just bad promotion for the games. If my game would be under the
> category (hell, so far it's vaporware on the public eye but maybe someday?)
> I'd request taking it off the site entirely, since I'd rather have no bad
> promotion than no promotion at all, but that's just me.

vaporware: /vay'pr-weir/ n. Products announced far in advance of any
release (which may or may not actually take place). See also brochureware.
- Jargon Lexicon http://www.science.uva.nl/~mes/jargon/v/vaporware.html

--
ABCGi

ABCGi

unread,
Jul 1, 2004, 10:29:07 AM7/1/04
to
ShockFrost wrote:

I think of it more as a homage to the legend of ShockFrost, not everyone
can tout having a memorial day and a concept named after them.

Now get back to coding ;)

Really, don't reply, just keep coding....

go on...

--
ABCGi

SZDev - Slash

unread,
Jul 1, 2004, 10:54:40 AM7/1/04