The One Thousand Most Annoying Things Ever!!

[OB1]

Wow, you sure do go to great lengths to manage to make it sound like you have absolutely no clue what I am saying... if you honestly think that I even remotely think any of your "examples" are videogames you must be quite deluded.

Yes, why don't you look at the site that you're linking! Look at that first (and most important) definition!!!!

(these are just the most relevant ones in 'image')


Now... the first defintion of Video Game is "An electronic or computerized game played by manipulating images on a video display or television screen."

One definition of Image -- one that fits, very, very well, in the case of text-based games -- is "A vivid description or representation.".

Okay, there are clear differences between text-based games and graphical ones. Text-based games describe something in words and have your mind create the picture based on those words. Like a book, except interactive... while graphical ones create the picture for you. But the words on the screen are a representation of the image... its still the image, but in a different form. Kind of like a 2d image versus a 3d one, taken to a larger degree...

Sure, its a quite different form of image, but its a quite good one. Words can do what pictures cannot, after all... I've always loved it when games let you examine things and get text explanations as they can say so much that pictures just can't adaquately do. Text-based games just take that one step further... its just a different form of the same art!

Oh, there is one other big category of text-based games other than interactive fiction (text-based adventure games) -- text-based RPGs and MUDs. Those are also games, similar to RPGs and MMORPGs respectively, except with no graphics... they were once relatively popular as well.

Interesting to know that MUDs aren't games, OB1... I guess you learn something every day...

What you are doing is taking one definition of a certain type of image and distorting it to fit your argument. Look at that first definition of video game again. It very clearly states that you have to manipulate and image on a video display or tv screen, not one that is in your mind! When you play a text-based game you are changing the image in your MIND, not the one on the screen! THAT is the major difference that you seem so hell-bent on trying to ignore, and why you lost this argument a LONG time ago.

"holes in the ground"? What in the WORLD are you talking about? It clearly has nothing do do with my point... because I never mention "holes". Just the fact that WW loves to put, in places where OoT would put a surface where you can walk but will take constant injury, a surface that might hurt you a quarter heart and teleports you to the room enterance, thus greatly decreasing the difficulty... are you trying really hard to act like you don't understand me or something? I don't get it...

Holes as in "places that you fall into".

Oh yeah, and WW is a step up from OoT in the complexity of the combat system, but the small amount of added depth is countered (from a fun standpoint) by the greatly lessened difficulty of said combat.

You take less damage in WW, but the enemies are much smarter and require you do do more than just stand and block like you do in OoT.

Maybe you don't see the difference, but I can see it quite clearly. OoT is still a fairly challenging game for me. Beating that thing with zero deaths would be quite hard. I haven't come anywhere near that in any of my plays of the game, and think that it'd require some pretty serious play to do... that or a lot of quitting just before I die and a bunch of time on my hands to redo what I've done already... WW? I am sure that I'll beat it with no deaths on my first try.

Try playing through OoT again and watch how you don't die. I've played through OoT several times now and the only time I ever die is during some boss fights, and even that is rare now.