ragnar

Do you sometimes listen to the really old classic scores from early gaming (such as from c64, amiga, etc.)? Out of the games even? Do you like the music by Rob Hubbard, Chris Huelsbeck, Martin Galway and the other good game composers? I sure do. Who is your favourite old game composer?

I'd guess 2035 after they've changed game engine another 30 times.

I would have sent you a postcard if I had went to China and if I knew your address.

I never was in China. Oh, you didn't mean me?

No, it's not necessarily poor design. Again, think of old games, where there were no saves. Think of games like Giana Sisters, Spindizzy, Monty on the Run and Bubble Bobble (you probably have some examples of your own). They would be utterly boring, and ridiculously easy if you were allowed to save in them. Nowadays game designers don't aim for really testing the skills of the player and rather want to tell stories so a good save game system is needed. It's all about what you want a player to experience with a game.

Hmm, maybe it's worth to look into the new Bards Tale. I never played the original, though, for some reason.

The sword fighting of PoP1 might not be the best element of the game, but yet it was quite fun, lots of more fun than SoT:s fighting.

As I wrote in AG, I wasn't too impressed by the demo. The new fighting moves leaves me cold. I didn't become more interested in the fights in this than in SoT. I probably won't play this game. I will probably go play PoP 2 instead (PoP: WW is no 5). I have played PoP 1 and 4 and so far the first is the best imho.

I think it is interesting to put this in a historical perspective. In the early days of computer gaming (such as the C64) there were very little saving possibilities at all. In most games there was no save option and you had to complete the game in one sitting. Completing a game in those days were a major accomplishment, something that's very difficult. Nowadays it's almost impossible to find such hard games, except if you impose restrictions on yourself when playing. Try finish some modern shooter in one sitting, i.e. without dying even once and I think you have a rather hard game in front of you. For a game that has the sole purpose of testing your skill, saving is bad, but when there is a story and rpg elements, you just get frustrated by not being able to save when you want since you don't want the story to be repeated over and over again. What I'm driving at is that when a save system is implemented you need to look at the purpose of the game. If it just is for skill, then you need only a really limited save system. If the purpose is that the player should be able to explore and try different paths, then an extensive save system would be needed.

How is the new Bard's Tale taking on it's heritage? What does it have in common with the original? Is it a remake or is it a new story?

You forgot some games, such as Pirates!, NFS Underground 2 and probably lots of other games too.

Sidplay is a wonderful program to play C64 music in it's original way. If you want to listen to that, I'd recommend the "High Voltage SID Collection", featuring 27500 SID tunes that together is just about 50 MB. http://www.hvsc.c64.org/

It also depends on the goal you have with the game. If you set up personal "unnecessary" goals, like I did when I played NOLF2 just now (I had the goal that I shouldn't be hit at all, to make the gameplay somwhat more interesting. In most missions I succeded, but some missions it simply wasn't feasible) you can need to be able to save more often. When I played Thief 3 I had the goal to not use physical violence at all, etc. It all depends on what you want to get out of the games you play and all playing styles should be promoted imho.

I haven't felt that I've lost immersion due to over-saving. Saving is as natural in a game as steering is. I loose more immersion by having to replay a long bit just because I didn't save. Plus, I like doing what Walter said, saving ammunition and other stuff that I might need later on. Or trying to make sure to not be detected in stealth games (like Thief).

Here you go:

So, they hope to protect their users from playing the demo or what is it they need the protection system for? I can advise the publishers of that game that it would have been much easier to not release the demo at all.

You don't? You need to check if it says "XBox" "PS2" or "Gamecube" at least and if you only own a PS1 (or other older console) you are in as a bad situation as if you own an old PC. And you are even less likely than on a PC to be able to play older console-games on newer machines, the exception being the playstation series.

No, I too was sorely disappointed by the story. There are some side-stories that are a little more interesting, but other than that it was rather boring. And yes, I don't think the initials JC were chosen at random.

Yes, I know. It's done in RRT3, so it can be done in other games, right? It's just that the rather poorly done camera management of RRT3 kills the fun (imo).

Even worse, roads can only go in four directions and trains can only go in 8 directions. I want a TT-clone where you can build the roads and rails in any direction.

I'm glad if I'll ever see it.

Hippopotamus!

You might want to read this page: http://www.math.utah.edu/~carlson/teaching/calculus/series.html

Yes, k goes to infinity. That's precisely the point of my proof and it has a limit at 1. It _is_ 1. Try read a math book about limit theory.

To make the correct proof of the original problem: inf --- 9 \ --- 0.9999999.... == / k --- 10 k=1 inf inf --- 9 --- 9 \ --- * 10 = \ --- / k / k --- 10 --- 10 k=1 k=0 inf inf 0 --- 9 --- 9 --- 9 9 9 \ --- - \ --- = \ --- = --- = --- = 9 / k / k / k 0 1 --- 10 --- 10 --- 10 10 k=0 k=1 k=0 This says that we have 10X-X=9, i.e. 9X = 9, i.e. X=1 Q.E.D.