The Calaf wrote:
> I shelled out the $20 for Chessmaster XI and found, just as I
> suspected I would, that the computer opponents still only take a
> nanosecond per move in rated play, thereby ruining the simulation of
> playing a real person.
It doesn't respond that quickly unless it is playing at a very low ELO
rating. Other top flight modern engines are even less good at simulating
sub ELO 1900 level play for rated games. Strength apparently sells.
>
> A real person would ordinarily take a nanosecond for one move, 20
> seconds for another, and perhaps two or three when stumped. You'd get
> the chance to evaluate the position the entire time.
Check in the personality to see if there is a delay setting
>
> A real person would also ask for a draw or possibly resign. None of
> the players do this.
The engines are usually very poor at seeing draws, but will resign.
Tweaking the contempt factor may help.
I can't be sure about Chessmaster because I seldom play it - I find
their intrusive copy protection far too irritating.
>
> So how does a game make that much money if its most im****tant
> particular, gameplay, is fatally flawed?
It is better at playing down to lower levels than most of the opposition
and its customisable player personas are quite cute. I wish that some of
the CB engines would offer something more along those lines.
CB engines are all megalomaniacs - whatever engine you last used starts
when you click any of the nominally "different" engine icons on the
desktop. I view that as a far more serious defect (but live with it).
Regards,
Martin Brown
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com
**
|
