In article <c9fc5515-2d89-46b6-b6f1-05a2d3f5e5b5
@q3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, qurqirishd.TakeThisOut@aol.com says...
> On Dec 8, 7:49 am, Dweeb <dbohnenber....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "VinegarTast...@gmail.com" <VinegarTast....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote innews:22d328b8-241b-4b37-9068-f3b13581aa52@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com:
> >
> > >http://www.edepot.com/gamintro.html
> >
> > Your intro shows you have no knowledge of game design. "The evolution of
> > games (and good game design) started with simple blocks of pixels (sprites)
> > that were manipulated via a joystick." is simply not true. Games have
> > existed for thousands of years.
>
> Yes, even if we assume he is only talking about modern electronic
> gaming, the first ones (that I recall) were those hand-held LCD
> football games, which had a 3x10 array of lights and three buttons
> (up, down, and forward).
> Giving further benefit of the doubt, that the intention was only on an
> actual computer, there were plenty of text-based games well before
> there was even a concept of graphics in the sense he is using.
Much more importantly, it includes the statement: "One major tradeoff
in the earlier days of games was having better graphics or more
intelligent gameplay." There has rarely been more than a sliver of
truth in this, even in the early days. Since AI does not scale well
with resources devoted to it, there is little noticeable difference in
the AI of a game whether it gets 10% or 90% of CPU.
- Gerry Quinn
>> Stay informed about: Good game design must have good strategic gameplay