On May 8, 2:46 pm, Rich Hutnik <richardhut...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> This is just the electronic variety. This is a large market. Should
> be enough to justify there being a table games network actually.
Right now, of course, things are in the early stages.
For example, while I think most Chess servers cost money to join,
there appear to be a lot of free Go servers. (Bizarrely enough,
there's even one in North Korea!)
So while I can't give specific advice, not being knowledgeable in this
area, it seems to me that having a viable business model - offering
something that people are willing to actually pay for - is a tricky
point.
On another topic... since I've found you in a group where it would be
on topic, some time back I ran across a book - "Play The Game" - with
illustrations of a lot of old commercial board games. A few looked
kind of interesting, such as the old Parker Brothers games Kilkenny
Cats and Chivalry.
I saw Inside Moves on sale, and thought it was a much smaller variant
of Chivalry (something slightly bigger than Cam, though), but I see I
was mistaken - instead, it was exactly the same as Camelot, which was
modified from Chivalry by being on a bigger board - but having only
four "knights" on each side instead of eight.
*Anyways*, in my search, I found the BoardGameGeek page for that, and
saw one brochure for Camelot which included a testimony for it from
none other than...
Jose Raoul Capablanca.
The quote was: "There is no question about the remarkable excellence
and lure of the game CAMELOT. It has given me real and exciting
pleasure. It cannot fail to reach an immense permanent popularity."
OK, so the last sentence wasn't quite on the mark.
It's a pity that because it is proprietary, like Ploy, it's probably
doomed to forever remain obscure. (Particularly for the sake of
Checkers players. If one is looking into putting more zing into Chess,
looking into how Go appears to have succeeded with _komida****_, and
how Checkers has coped, with two-move restrictions, three-move
restrictions, and the eleven-man ballot, with a situation of more
severity - one very different from Chess, because it was bad enough to
force the vast majority of players to admit something had to be done;
Chess is far from that point.)
John Savard
|
