Re: A Game Needing To Be Invented.

On Feb 6, 8:47 pm, "markste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <markste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> Nick, that would be the ideal game in a parallel universe where this
> group is called rec.games.kludge.  Here's what I'd like to see in your
> next game: Interesting new principle embodied in a minimal set of
> rules.  No draws or ties.  Equal goals.  No cliche elements like the
> Checkers jump, the n-in-a-row winning condition, or a board full of
> pawns racing to the other side.

Those elements are cliche, but apparently these aren't?

1.Picking up beans and dropping them into the following holes.
2.Forming a connection between two sides.
3.Eliminating all the other side's pieces.

Isn't it time you realized that the games you want to make aren't the
only ones worth inventing? I have great respect for the games you
make, but also the games Cameron Browne, Jo=E3o Pedro Neto, Bill Taylor
and Nicholas Bentley make - even if it's apparent you all have vastly
different ideals for what a game should be. If you started actually
_playing_ games besides just inventing them, maybe your horizons could
be broadened a little?