[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-games-devel
Subject:    Re: [Kde-games-devel] Regarding Mancala
From:       Inge Wallin <inge () lysator ! liu ! se>
Date:       2010-05-07 6:57:45
Message-ID: 201005070857.45556.inge () lysator ! liu ! se
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 03 May 2010 23:51:03 Mauricio Piacentini wrote:
> I do not disagree with your review, Dimitry. I think you summarize the
> 
> situation well in your first paragraph:
> > Disclaimer: these points apply if we want to re-consider our quality
> > standards for the games to meet to be included in kdegames. If we review
> > the games by comparing to the existing ones in our module, then mancala
> > is more or less ok.
> 
> That was my metric: comparison with the existing ones. I mentioned the
> problem with the lack of theme configuration, and your points about
> difficulty, the combobox and hardcoded stuff are very important as
> well.
> 
> > Otherwise:
> > I do not read manuals. I want
> > gameplay. So. At least basic tutorial is needed.
> 
> Ideally, yes. The manual is kind of ok, it gives the basics for this
> type of game, and explains that the variations that are included
> depend on the region, etc. It is no substitute for a tutorial. But if
> we implement the "tutorial is needed" rule, then almost all of our
> existing games have to be worked on. My point is: if you take you
> description of your mother opening up Mancala (which is accurate) and
> substitute it by Kmahjongg, KShisen, KMines and many others the
> problem would be more or less the same :) So we are already in deep
> trouble regarding mothers and games. :)
> 
> So I do not disagree, but I am not sure how we should handle this.
> Maybe it-s is right, and we should simply purge most games and
> implement a new level of quality needed (let us say for 4.6).

This is like throwing out the baby with the bath water, to use an analogy that 
I never really liked.  As you write below, almost nothing would be left.

> Then we
> would only have very good games in the module, but I believe only 4 or
> 5 now would make the cut (KPat, KGoldrunner and maybe 2 or 3 more).
> This might not be a bad thing after all, it can be a shake up that
> will produce better stuff in the near future.

I don't understand this urge to throw things out.  Sure, a tutorial is a good 
thing.  Nevertheless, many many people have already managed to play the ones 
that we already have.  Besides, what's boring with a less-than-perfect game? 
Isn't one of the critiques of the gaming industry the last few years that it's 
all surface and the game experience has suffered for it?

And to say that "users" wouldn't understand Mancala is to show a great 
cultural bias.  *We* may not understand it, but almost everybody in Africa 
would.  Mancala is the national game of many african countries -- I learned 
this when I was in a seminar where one of the topics was how to "solve" 
mancala, i.e. determine perfect play and the ultimate outcome if both players 
play perfectly.

Anyway, if you really want to have every game to have a tutorial, then I'm all 
for it as long as a game is not thrown out if it doesn't.  Why not introduce a 
set or "must" and "should" rules for being in kdegames?  In my opinion, the 
tutorial belongs squarely in the "should" camp.

	-Inge
_______________________________________________
kde-games-devel mailing list
kde-games-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-games-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]