Re: Gameplay theory: leaving object behind..


12 Sep 1995 23:09:47 GMT

In article <4333qe$1fq@cnn.Princeton.EDU>, adam@flagstaff.princeton.edu (Adam J. Thornton) says:

>A game should not require that every object have a use in the game. I'm
>all for hideously detailed games that have a great many objects that have
>no relevance to the game. Don't let the player get away with "I can pick
>it up--it must be useful".
>
>This, oddly, is something that works better in a graphical game like
>_Avarice_ than in a text adventure, where the necessity to enumerate each
>object would lead to absolutely unwieldy screens of text.

Not necessarily - you don't have to list every portable object in
the main room desription, after all. You could easily say something
like "There are some knick-knacks on the dresser.", and give a more
detailed description only if the player examines it.

**************************************************************************
Trevor Barrie tbarrie@peinet.pe.ca "It's a great big universe,
87 Kennedy Drive and we're all really puny;
West Royalty, PEI we're just tiny little specks
C1E 1X7 CANADA (902) 628-6845 about the size of Mickey Rooney."
**************************************************************************