Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start

From: russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams)

Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1993 07:28:50 +0000

In article <CA3o4L.3zE@dcs.ed.ac.uk> gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews) writes:
>If I wanted to make a PBM game that was a tennis game then somehow
>I have to include all the physical variation (that goes on in a real
>game of tennis) in my PBM game. If you don't do this then you are not
>really simulating tennis (and the context of this discussion was
>simulation games).

Yes, but I think what I was trying to get at was that even if you do
completely model all the physics of the ball, racket & human body in
your tennis game, you are not really simulating tennis, because a
pbm game is inherently a cerebral process: you read your results
and figure out your turn and mail it back, whereas tennis is
inherently a physical reaction contest: you see the ball coming
and figure out your reaction, and then you have to do it!

The experience of running an empire, e.g., is primarily mental;
physical dexterity does not matter.  You receive reports from
the front and you give military orders, etc.

The experience of tennis is primarily physical (as well as mental).

A disabled person could run an empire well, but would not play
tennis well against an abled person.

To say that "the 2 types of games (mental and physical)
>are so qualitatively different that discussing tennis/golf in the same
>context as board/pbm games is useless" is simply saying that you prefer
>to limit yourself to PBMs that do things in a certain way. There is no
>a priori reason that a PBM game of tennis could not include the variability
>in tennis!

Right, the pbm game could include all the variability, but it can't
really tell how well the player is at the physical aspects of tennis,
which are a significant part of the experience.  (I'm talking about the
player, not about the character in the game.)  I suppose one could
observe the real player and gather statistics on their abilities,
e.g. measure how fast they can run and so forth, and then use that
in the program, so that the player might give the order "I run and
try to lob ball over net to coordinate (34,56)" and the program
evaluates what happens based on the stored statistics of the player,
but that precludes the possibility of the player learning & improving
as the game progresses and also feels like a rather dry unfun sports
simulation.  (Not to mention being quite impractical to gather
the player stats in the first place.)

I think the problem is that the physical aspect is too significant
a part of tennis.  There are other games, like the gladiatorial
combat games, that seem to be popular pbm games; I would guess that
the popularity comes from there being more mental decision making
involved in addition to the physical thrusts and running around that
a real duel entails.  But maybe this is just my bias; I certainly
admit that playing in a pbm tennis game (or other highly physical
game) seems unappealing (and even silly -- why not play the real
thing?).

Russ

References

Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 11:48:17 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Wed, 07 Jul 1993 12:21:44 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams)
Mon, 12 Jul 1993 19:18:35 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 13 Jul 1993 11:05:08 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 11:48:17 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Wed, 07 Jul 1993 12:21:44 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams)
Mon, 12 Jul 1993 19:18:35 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 13 Jul 1993 11:05:08 +0000