Re: FLAGSHIP #88 - AD

From: madcentral@aol.com (MadCentral)

Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 12:26:31 +0000

>>People in this ng seem to think that a little style equates to 'rubbish'.<<

Not me, Roy.  I think a little style is a smart move.

>>If you're a REAL PBM player it seems you have to
1)Love crappy looking printouts, because not having crappy printouts will
indicate that the game is shallow.<<

I have rather a lot of players who would disagree with this, you'll be pleased
to know. <grin>

>>Gawd I can hear the rattling of walking sticks even now. How long before PBM
disappears up its own bum, with an asthmatic wheeze and a request for
someone to pass the inhaler?<<

PBM, or at least commercial PBM, has shown constant and uncompromising
improvement in the ''look'' or turns over the last decade.  In the 'free'
games' arena, this isn't quite as relevent, but Im sure that most GMs would
want people to like the look of their turns.

There certainly are (as we have seen) still people around who think that a game
has to be all-text, or HTML, or something, so that players can write their own
programs.
Myself, I expect thats a 'spin off' crowd rather than the 'whole' of PBM.
Certainly, my own experience suggests that players want good-looking turns
rather than 'easy to play about with' turns and so thats the direction I've
gone in.

Recently, I asked my players who wanted an option to receive turns as HTML
(currently they are PDFs).  Over 1000 people got that message.  Only ONE person
said they wanted a HTML option.  That was pretty conclusive,as far as I was
concerned, but any other GM should always do whatever they think is best for
their own audience.  Im sure theres plenty of room for both types of turn and
game, without us needing to slander one another about which is 'real' and which
isnt. <g>

Steve T.

References

Re: FLAGSHIP #88 - AD
"Roy Pollard" <plod@ntlworld.com>
Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:44:39 +0000

Referenced By

Re: FLAGSHIP #88 - AD
"Roy Pollard" <plod@ntlworld.com>
Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:44:39 +0000