PYC118@uriacc.uri.edu (Rasiel) (04/10/91)
Does anyone out there play chess? I'm thinking of buying a chess game and have narrowed the options down to Checkmate and Chessmaster 2100. If anyone can sway me to one game or the other I'd appreciate it. I currently have Battlechess and though it is cute it is also very tough and has few options; it's as if most of the effort went into the animations (which get boresome quickly) rather than the gameplay. Rasiel
n298ad@tamuts.tamu.edu (John Jordan) (04/10/91)
Checkmate has an ELO rating of 2000+ which is 80 pts higher than Chessmaster2100 on a 386. (This is in the Checkmate manual.) The scale goes from 1000 - 2750, with 2750 being Gary Kasparov. I haven't used 2100, but I can tell you a few features of Checkmate. - View from any angle. - Learns 'strong' moves - Can design your own pieces - Gives you your rating on the ELO scale - Unlimited 'rewind' or takebacks, and Fast forward - Installs on HD - Uses Extra ram, and Advanced processors That's what I know. I think it's a great program. -John
hoffmann@acl.kodak.com (marty hoffmann) (04/10/91)
I have seen ChessMaster 2100 on an IBM PC and I own Chessmaster 2000 for the Amiga. If the Amiga version of CM2100 is like the IBM version, I'm going to have to buy it. I find ChessMaster's style of play quite solid. The Coffee House mode is nice too. In that mode, CM won't necessarily make the best move it finds, but it won't make brain-dead moves either. The interface to (the IBM version of) CM2100 is very nice. There is a "war room" mode, that displays the board on one part of the screen and lots of useful information on the other side of the screen (like what the computer is thinking about). This is a great improvement over CM2000, where the information screens covered the board. I've also heard that CM2100 will play real timed games. I.e., if you limit it's time and it runs out of time, it admits to losing (but gives you the option to continue the game). I hope the Amiga version supports this, because I love speed chess and am looking forward to some 5 minute games. I haven't seen Checkmate, but I am a little concerned. A while back, I bought a program called "Chess Player 2150". It claimed to be the best chess program around, and it supposedly won some British Chess Open for computers. Anyway, the magazine ad description for Checkmate is almost word-for-word the description on the back of the box for Chess Player 2150. Here's my opinion of that program (not Checkmate): - User interface was terrible (mouse moves very sluggish) - Graphics were not very good - "What if" feature very difficult to use (to the point of being useless). - Display of move analysis suffered same problem as CM2000. I.e., you can't view the board at the same time. In fact, I liked the information displayed by CM2000 better (and CM2100 even better). - Play levels went from brain dead to very good, with little inbetween. I didn't do a head to head comparison with CM2000, but I got the feeling that CM2000 was a better player (just my opinion) - Irritating digitized voice (you could turn it off, but you always had to here that first "Hello, I am chess player. Would you like a game?" -- like I would boot the damn thing up and then say "no"?). - Program supposed to learn as you play it. I am very sceptical about programs that "learn". CM2000 doesn't learn, but it started out smart enough to beat me and remains smart enough to beat me. - Program includes a ratings test based on a fixed set of chess problems -- some people swear that this gives a good feel for where you might stand in the real ratings -- yeah sure. Even if Checkmate is a repackaging of Chess Player 2150 (anyone care to comment?), I'm sure Interplay would have at least improved the user interface. As for bells and whistles like "learning" and a "ratings test", these are not as important as how it works in a normal game. Checkmate is supposed to let you add lines to its opening book, via a text file. This is another whistle (or is it a bell), unless you are so into chess, that you often play obscure openings not already included in every program's opening book. Both Chessmaster and Chess Player could easily beat me at higher levels of play, so I would say the one with the better interface is the one to go with. I like to play the computer and use it to analyze chess problems, so how well these two features are integrated is very important to me. My advice is to look before you buy, and if you can't do that, buy Chessmaster 2100 -- probably the safer bet. (BTW, hard disk installability would also be an important issue to me. Does anyone know whether either CM2100 or Checkmate are hard disk installable?) Marty Hoffmann
algoa@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Gregory Bowers) (04/10/91)
hoffmann@acl.kodak.com (marty hoffmann) writes: >look before you buy, and if you can't do that, buy Chessmaster 2100 -- >probably the safer bet. >(BTW, hard disk installability would also be an important issue to me. Does >anyone know whether either CM2100 or Checkmate are hard disk installable?) > Marty Hoffmann Chessmaster 2100 is hard disk installable. I've also seen both Chessmaster 2100 and Checkmate. The only one I'd be tempted to play is the Chessmaster 2100. I think you're correct about Checkmate coming from the Chess Player 2150 (was that the name?). Anyway the Chessmaster make playing chess fun, even if you almost always lose to computers. If I can beat it, anyone can. Amiga is die beste! 'n IBM is 'n rekenaar? Die Mac is net 'n vrot appel! Watch this space for Blazer playoff updates! algoa@eecs.cs.pdx.edu Portland TrailBlazers now 58-18 and KICKING ASS!
2fmlempire@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (04/11/91)
In article <50224@nigel.ee.udel.edu>, PYC118@uriacc.uri.edu (Rasiel) writes: > Does anyone out there play chess? I'm thinking of buying a chess game and > have narrowed the options down to Checkmate and Chessmaster 2100. If anyone > can sway me to one game or the other I'd appreciate it. I currently have > Battlechess and though it is cute it is also very tough and has few options; > it's as if most of the effort went into the animations (which get boresome > quickly) rather than the gameplay. > Rasiel Well, from what I've read, Checkmate is for the both the novice and *serious* Chess players. One of its main features that caught my interest is that the game learns from its own mistakes each time you play it. It also watches your strategies and incorporates them into its own playing ability (making him a tougher opponent since he can recognize your strategies.) It also comes with a set of "chess problems" that will gauge your chess level abilities (the one they use for master chess players, can't remember what it was called though.) David Poland 2fmlempire@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
c315-25@cs.UAlberta.CA (Huisman Kenneth M) (04/11/91)
In article <1991Apr10.125126.23100@ssd.kodak.com> hoffmann@acl.kodak.com (marty hoffmann) writes: >I have seen ChessMaster 2100 on an IBM PC and I own Chessmaster 2000 >for the Amiga. If the Amiga version of CM2100 is like the IBM version, >I'm going to have to buy it. > >I find ChessMaster's style of play quite solid. The Coffee House mode is >nice too. In that mode, CM won't necessarily make the best move it finds, >but it won't make brain-dead moves either. I haven't seen CM2100, but I found CM2000 to be rather dull and repetitive. As a sort-of semi-serious chessplayer, I find that CM2000 does not give enough variety within any set position. > >The interface to (the IBM version of) CM2100 is very nice. There is a >"war room" mode, that displays the board on one part of the screen and >lots of useful information on the other side of the screen (like what >the computer is thinking about). This is a great improvement over CM2000, >where the information screens covered the board. But is the information that it gives the same kind of info that CM2000 gives? I found CM2000's information screens rather useless. The trouble with computer chess is that computers generally know little (or nothing) of positional play. All CM2000 gave you in its info screens was its heuristic evaluation of each line it was thinking of. It is of absolutely no help if you are trying to learn positional chess concepts. <stuff about timed games deleted> >I haven't seen Checkmate, but I am a little concerned. A while back, I >bought a program called "Chess Player 2150". It claimed to be the best >chess program around, and it supposedly won some British Chess Open for >computers. Anyway, the magazine ad description for Checkmate is almost >word-for-word the description on the back of the box for Chess Player 2150. >Here's my opinion of that program (not Checkmate): > > - User interface was terrible (mouse moves very sluggish) > - Graphics were not very good > - "What if" feature very difficult to use (to the point of being > useless). > - Display of move analysis suffered same problem as CM2000. I.e., > you can't view the board at the same time. In fact, I liked the > information displayed by CM2000 better (and CM2100 even better). > - Play levels went from brain dead to very good, with little > inbetween. I didn't do a head to head comparison with CM2000, > but I got the feeling that CM2000 was a better player (just my > opinion) > - Irritating digitized voice (you could turn it off, but you always > had to here that first "Hello, I am chess player. Would you like > a game?" -- like I would boot the damn thing up and then say "no"?). ^^^^^^^^ A friend of mine who has an atari ST has CM2000 and it has a voice like this too. > - Program supposed to learn as you play it. I am very sceptical > about programs that "learn". CM2000 doesn't learn, but it started > out smart enough to beat me and remains smart enough to beat me. ^^^^^ What is it supposed to 'learn'? I agree with this somewhat. Although it is really easy to 'learn' a chess opening (you just type it in and the computer has 'learned' it :-) > - Program includes a ratings test based on a fixed set of chess > problems -- some people swear that this gives a good feel for > where you might stand in the real ratings -- yeah sure. > >Even if Checkmate is a repackaging of Chess Player 2150 (anyone care to >comment?), I'm sure Interplay would have at least improved the user interface. >As for bells and whistles like "learning" and a "ratings test", these are >not as important as how it works in a normal game. Checkmate is supposed to >let you add lines to its opening book, via a text file. This is another >whistle (or is it a bell), unless you are so into chess, that you often play >obscure openings not already included in every program's opening book. > I really think that allowing you to add lines to its book is an *excellent* feature. If you play tournament chess (like I do occasionally), you find that you have to learn one or two opening systems rather well in order to excel. I wanted to use CM2000 to learn an opening once but its opening book is *pathetic* for that purpose. It generally only knew one line in any particular opening to any reasonable depth. At least with this feature you can make an inadequate opening book into an adequate one. It would be nicer even if you could have some sort of opening learning mode where you could play a move and see all the possible replies from its opening book. >Both Chessmaster and Chess Player could easily beat me at higher levels of >play, so I would say the one with the better interface is the one to go with. >I like to play the computer and use it to analyze chess problems, so how well >these two features are integrated is very important to me. My advice is to >look before you buy, and if you can't do that, buy Chessmaster 2100 -- >probably the safer bet. > I want to use my Amiga to learn chess openings, and play against an opponent that knows and understands those opening systems. Unfortunately, they don't make ChessBase for the amiga, so I have to look at these other programs and hope that they offer at least some of the same features. >(BTW, hard disk installability would also be an important issue to me. Does >anyone know whether either CM2100 or Checkmate are hard disk installable?) > Ken Huisman c315-25@cs.ualberta.ca
t904012@mp.cs.niu.edu (Philthy Bierdz) (04/12/91)
Chessmaster is probably the best version out there. I have the old
Chessmaster 2000 and it has proven to play a very good game even at the
easy, fast-game levels. I understand that there is a Chessmaster 2100
out there. It's supposed to have even more options then the 2000. How
this could be, I don't know. Either way, unless your rated at 2100 or
above, this program should prove to be quite challenging.
Philthy
t904012@niu.edu