jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson) (01/21/88)
>Until all the magic cookie terminals out there are gone to that great terminal >graveyard in the sky, perhaps we ought to leave off the emphasis, ok? In my opinion, any remaining magic cookie terminals should be thrown from a window on the 20th floor. Or perhaps "accidentally" hooked up to 220 volts so that you can watch them explode. Any company that still manufactures magic cookie terminals should get the same treatment. Seriously, magic cookies are so incredibly braindamaged that everyone ought to pretend that these terminals can't do highlighting at all. I think it's dumb to even TRY to make programs work correctly with magic cookies. No flames please. Just an opinion.
elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (01/22/88)
in article <4590@teddy.UUCP>, jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson) says: > Xref: killer rec.games.hack:2054 comp.terminals:616 >>Until all the magic cookie terminals out there are gone to that great terminal >>graveyard in the sky, perhaps we ought to leave off the emphasis, ok? > In my opinion, any remaining magic cookie terminals should be thrown > from a window on the 20th floor. Or perhaps "accidentally" hooked up > to 220 volts so that you can watch them explode. Any company that > still manufactures magic cookie terminals should get the same treatment. Are you willing to pay for the replacements? I'm sure that USL would accept the gift with gratitude! USL has two terminal rooms full of 10-year-old magic-cookie terminals, through the wonders of bid laws that bind state universities (nobody thought about specifying "no magic cookies", a pity). I imagine there's lots of places in a similiar predicament, at least in the 2/3rds of the U.S. that has been in an economic slump since the early 80's (basically, the entire middle of the U.S., the farm belt and the oil patch)... when you have enough money to buy 25 VT100 clones or 50 magic cookie terminals, and you need 50 terminals desperately, well.... > Seriously, magic cookies are so incredibly braindamaged that everyone > ought to pretend that these terminals can't do highlighting at all. I agree, for the most part. Back when I played Larn, that was what I did -- remove all highlighting from the termcap. Couldn't tell the difference between monsters and artifacts then, though.... I still think it's a bad idea to expand Hack's character set... what ought to be done, instead, is to get rid of one monster for every one added. There comes a time when things simply get ridiculous... -- Eric Lee Green elg@usl.CSNET Asimov Cocktail,n., A verbal bomb {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg detonated by the mention of any Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 subject, resulting in an explosion Lafayette, LA 70509 of at least 5,000 words.
dnh@cisunx.UUCP (01/24/88)
--
David L. Heyman "Rotzim shalom, VMS: dlhst@pittvms.Bitnet
University salam, shalom, dlhst@cisvm2.CCnet
of sharim, sharim Unix: ...!pitt!cisunx!dlhst
Pittsburgh shalom...." dlhst@cisunx.UUCPpurtill@faline.bellcore.com (Mark Purtill) (01/24/88)
In article <> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes: >I still think it's a bad idea to expand Hack's character set... what ought to >be done, instead, is to get rid of one monster for every one added. There >comes a time when things simply get ridiculous... The trouble with this is that eventually *all* the monsters will be special in some way. (Because `boring' monsters will be the one(s) to go). How about this tho: There would be in general more than one monster per letter. At the start of the game, the program would pick one monster from each letter to use in that game. So for instance, in a game you would either find giant rats or rockmoles, but not both. Comments? ^.-.^ purtill@math.mit.edu (("))
kent@xanth.cs.odu.edu (Kent Paul Dolan) (01/27/88)
In article <1729@faline.bellcore.com> purtill@faline.UUCP (Mark Purtill) writes: >In article <> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes: >>I still think it's a bad idea to expand Hack's character set... what ought to >>be done, instead, is to get rid of one monster for every one added. There >>comes a time when things simply get ridiculous... > >The trouble with this is that eventually *all* the monsters will be special >in some way. (Because `boring' monsters will be the one(s) to go). How about >this tho: There would be in general more than one monster per letter. At >the start of the game, the program would pick one monster from each letter >to use in that game. So for instance, in a game you would either find giant >rats or rockmoles, but not both. > >Comments? > >^.-.^ purtill@math.mit.edu >((")) I'm kind of fond of the system used in some of the Rogue games, where the same symbol stands for a scarier monster on a deeper level. That way, a few dozen letters can provide a selection of hundreds of different monster types, without insulting really stupid terminals by trying to make them act intelligent enough to highlight, or whatever. Yes, I think that this would be a MAJOR change. Kent, the man from xanth.