|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> So nice an idea, so bad an execution, so dumb a set of specifications
I think that pretty much sums up my involvement. Along with "hey, if you
want people to do serious scripting, let the scripts actually deal with
errors and such." I can understand it's all asynchronous and distributed
and such, but at least tell me when something breaks. And at least let
someone tell me it's OK to put restrictions on what they can do while
they're (say) playing a game.
I did a board game where you could cheat if you saw the other guy's side
(think "battleship"), and I spent more time dealing with bugs in the
engine and making sure you weren't cheating than I did on the game logic
*or* the artwork.
I was thinking of doing M.U.L.E. or something, but not being able to
have people follow rules just ruled that out, along with not being able
to (say) know when an object creation failed, or being able to reset the
board.
Altho flying around and seeing 300 stores with absolutely nobody
anywhere in sight was kind of creepy. Huge monuments to dead military
relatives and such, with nobody there to even look... Creepy.
Great business idea. Sucky execution. I understand they now let you at
least import geometry from geometry editors, just like every other game
engine written in the last 15 years. :-)
-- Franklin Pomeray
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |