Serious, maybe. Commerically viable these days... well, we know better,
don't we? :)
(Much insightful stuff about criticism clipped...I agree, in general.)
>Elements of this thread smack of the notion that all things are equally
>good when considered in the appropriate context. I admit I don't buy that;
>for example, IMHO, Handel's _Messiah_ is better than Michael Jackson's
>_HIStory_ in an absolute sense.
Not if you want to dance. Same old Baggett, I see...some things never
change, do they? Didn't I squash this argument of yours into the ground
six years ago? :)
>I'd say the same thing of _Detective_ vs. _Trinity_ --- wouldn't you?
Same genre. Not the same argument. "Music in General" <> "IF"
>Saying that all works are equally good benefits neither the readers nor the
>authors. All IF works are not equally good; not even close.
No, but you've got to define your terms. If the author's trying to write
a silly game with a lot of weird spellings (for example, hah hah) then
he's not going to write "Detective."
>dmb@ai.mit.edu ADVENTIONS: Kuul text adventures! Email for a catalog.
(Could you take this line out of your sig sometime?)
-----
Dave Leary
(Nope, my views don't represent UMAB...good thing, huh?)
"If you get more luck, wouldn't there be less luck available for me?"
- Dogbert