Pages

Wednesday, October 11, 2023

m199h: New Findings Both Solve and Deepen Mysteries

 
The best evidence we currently have on "m199h." This cover page comes from a sheaf of documents printed in 1976 or 1977 by a player who played "m199h."
         
This entry serves as an update to information that I previously offered in my entry "Everything We Know About 1970s Mainframe RPGs We Can No Longer Play."
   
Regular readers and aficionados of CRPG history know the basic backstory: The first known CRPGs were created on the PLATO educational platform hosted by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. They include The Dungeon ("pedit5"), The Game of Dungeons ("dnd"), Orthanc, Moria, Oubliette, and Avatar. The earliest of them started to appear within a year of the first tabletop edition of Dungeons & Dragons (1974). These games were written furtively by students, using lesson names that disguised that they were games. When found, the earliest of them were mercilessly deleted by system administrators.
 
A screen shot from The Dungeon ("pedit5") which ultimately survived the purge.
        
For years, a game with the lesson name of "m199h" has been mentioned by various authors as the legendary lost "first" CRPG. The primary source seems to be Dirk Pellett's history of the PLATO RPGs on Cyber1: "It is 'common knowledge' that someone created the very first dungeon simulation game in a lesson called 'm199h.'" Similarly, Brian Dear wrote in The Friendly Orange Glow (2017), a history of PLATO: "Legend has it that an earlier gamer, with the equally obscure name of 'm119h' [sic], pre-dates Pedit5, but no one remembers who wrote it or when exactly it appeared."
    
Dirk Pellett's history of PLATO CRPGs. I now believe "common knowledge" is wrong.
          
Two major things happened over the summer:
   
  • A PLATO developer who had played "m199h" sent me a handful of photographs related to the game.
  • Rubén, our resident Explorador de RPG, launched an exhaustive search of the PLATO text files and did his best to track down every person mentioned in any of them.
       
The result of this new material can be summarized as follows: Despite what earlier sources have claimed, "m199h" is probably not the first CRPG; that honor almost certainly goes to Reginald Rutherford's The Dungeon ("pedit5"). Instead, "m199h" (which had the actual name of Dungeon) was likely a 1976 remake and expansion of "pedit5" that had lofty ambitions but was deleted before they were realized.
    
For evidence, we begin with documents shared with me by Don Gillies, a software engineer whose father, Donald Bruce Gillies, was a professor at the university. Don didn't attend the university until he went for graduate degrees in the late 1980s, but he had access to PLATO via terminals at Urbana High School. In 1977, he wrote Swords & Sorcery, which I covered a few years ago.
    
Once connected to the system, Gillies discovered "m199h" and loved it. Knowing that it was in danger of deletion, he printed as much of the documentation as he could and made graph paper drawings of monster images. He kept these documents for years and recently photographed them and shared those photographs with me. He has since also posted them in a comment on The Data-Driven Gamer blog.
      
Gillies' recreation of some of the graphics from "m199h."
        
You can see the full album of images here (I will repost them in my own album if that link goes down). If you enable comments, you can see my initial reactions to some of them and Gillies' reply. There are several problems with the album:
     
  • The only evidence we have that any of them come from a game with the lesson name "m199h" is Gillies' own handwritten note on the cover page; however, this note was made in 1976 or 1977 and was thus unlikely to be completely inaccurate.
  • Gillies' own notes say that some of the images are not from "m199h" but are from the also-lost "Think" series of games that inspired Gillies' own Swords & Sorcery. Some may also be from the lost Pits of Baradur.
  • Many of the images specifically seem to duplicate maps and instructions from "pedit5" (The Dungeon).
      
The game's help file confirms its name as Dungeon.
         
That last point seems damning, and at first I thought that Gillies had simply mixed up the games. But over time, I became more persuaded that these images duplicate (or near-duplicate) The Dungeon precisely because "m199h" was a copy of The Dungeon. Specifically, I now believe the following about "m199h":
       
  • The game's actual name was Dungeon.
  • The game played like "pedit5." A single character entered a large dungeon, fought monsters, cast spells, and collected treasures.
  • Its monster list included griffins, harpies, demons, dragons, deaths, wizards, werewolves, dwarves, thieves, Spirits of Christmas, vampires, dwarf wizards, medusas, cockatrices, ogres, goblins, hobgoblins, zombies, nazguls, and wraiths. Many of these shared the same graphics. There may also have been some punny monsters with names like "hisnia" and "yourgraine" (after hernia and migraine).
  • The character would have been a combination fighter/magic-user/cleric/thief, just like "pedit5."
  • Its spell list promised every spell available in the Greyhawk supplement (March 1975) to the D&D rules, whereas "pedit5" only offered about a third of them. Whether all of these spells were actually programmed is uncertain; "pedit5" had listed more than actually worked, with the yet-to-be-programmed spells identified in the instructions with an asterisk.
          
A spell list from the game that Gillies identifies as "m199h." These are identical to the Level 3 cleric and magic-user spells offered in the Greyhawk supplement to Dungeons & Dragons.
     
  • "m199h" introduced teleporters and chest traps, both of which "pedit5" had lacked.
  • "m199h" removed the framing backstory that "pedit5" had offered; the only goal is to collect treasures and experience and retire in the Hall of Fame.
      
The most compelling images are the monster lists and spell lists, neither of which precisely match any known PLATO game; Gillies insists that they both come from "m199h." Another good piece of evidence is the page titled "Helplesson for Dungeon," which I thought at first was an early version of "pedit5" but am now inclined to think is from "m199h" and is later rather than earlier, since the spell list is expanded and there are new mechanics mentioned in the instructions.
        
Beholders did not exist in "pedit5" but apparently did in "m199h."
       
The game's map remains a mystery. Gillies' album is full of maps that cannot possibly be from the same game. A couple, depicting a single-level dungeon, are identical to "pedit5" (one is rotated). One of them has a core identical to "pedit5" but different edges, as it shrinks "pedit5's" 30 x 30 dungeon into 20 x 20. Several of the maps depict multi-leveled dungeons with smaller levels. 
     
Perhaps the "m199h" map. The "pedit5" map was more than twice as large but featured many of the same room layouts.
            
I believe we are on firmer ground with the dates. All the existing stories about "m199h" say that it was quickly identified and deleted, suggesting that it existed for a blink in between the appearance of tabletop Dungeons & Dragons in 1974 and the release of "pedit5" in 1975. But whether Gillies is correct about all of the images or not, he clearly encountered "m199h" at a time he was interested in "remaking" it, and he is relatively sure that wouldn't have been until late 1976 or early 1977. Again, this timeline better supports the notion that "m199h" was intended as a follow-up to "pedit5."
 
Finally, we have a random collection of anecdotes. Josh Tabin, author of Camelot (1982), has always contended that "m199h" and "pedit5" were the same game; he reiterated this belief in a 3 September email to El Explorador. Don Gillies called around a bit after sharing the images with me and sent me opinions from several contemporary students that "pedit5" was the first PLATO CRPG.
     
After Don Gillies sent me the images, I shared them with El Explorador de RPG, Nathan Mahney at CRPG Adventures, Ahab at the Data-Driven Gamer, and RPG scholar Matt Barton, looking for confirmation of my initial reactions. Each had something to offer, but Rubén ("El Explorador") really took it and ran. He is planning a multi-part account of his process and findings on his own blog; suffice here to say that he mined the PLATO notes files for everything they had and embarked on a summer-long campaign to track down every PLATO game developer and player still on this Earth. In the process, he discovered the origins of a commonly-used graphics set, confirmed some important dates for games we already knew about, discovered tantalizing hints about additional CRPG authors, and conclusively dispelled some existing claims about the origins of both "pedit5" and "m199h." I'll let you read the rest of his fascinating coverage for more on his findings.
     
It was always too much to hope that we'd ever see "m199h" in action. I had hoped we could at least identify the author. It's not impossible that one of the many people that Rubén tried to reach will eventually get in touch. Until then, I am satisfied that the preponderance of the evidence grants the title of "first CRPG" to "pedit5."

56 comments:

  1. Fascinating and important historical work!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes! I am very glad these became available! I know you had mentioned them before and had been waiting for them to come out. My personal pet theory after reading everything I could find has been that pedit5 was the first and mlh199 was either unfinished or another game... or a later copy. That seems most likely given the lack of anyone who can state it was earlier the pedit5. I am very much looking forward to Ruben's expose!

      Delete
  2. This is truly incredible. Fifty years(!) after these games came and went, and there's still new information to be gleaned from people who were there at Ground Zero. Indescribably cool.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great stuff! You caption the fourth image as "Gillies' recreation of some of the graphics from m199h", and later note that "Many of the images specifically seem to duplicate maps and instructions from pedit5".

    But what was most striking to me is seeing that they exactly match the images that (blog commenter) half was able to mine from the 1975 Dungeon game. You later mention that "Many of these [monsters] shared the same graphics" -- it's certainly the exact, pixel-to-pixel match that really stopped me in my tracks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As EEDRPG will cover, a single developer created a graphics set based on the D&D Greyhawk expansion and made them public for any RPG developer to use.

      Delete
    2. The pixel monsters shown are quite nice.

      Delete
    3. Sounds great, Addict -- something to look forward to reading. I hope there's a nice chart at the end of this rainbow, as my head still swims when I try to understand how all these things are connected. (And how many 1970s PLATO games were called Dungeon: are we now up to three?!)

      Delete
    4. Yes, I was delighted to see them here in all their graph paper and graphite glory. I'm really looking forward to hearing the history of these extremely compelling icons. It is crazy to me that the very earliest RPGs looked this good. The story I'd heard was of ASCII in adventure- and roguelike- games slowly advancing towards elegant graphics, but here they were in the first flowering of the RPG.

      Delete
    5. Arthurdawg here! PLATO was so amazingly advanced for its time... really a remarkable effort and surprising in some way that it didn't make a bigger splash in the early era.

      Brian Deer's "Friendly Orange Glow" is a great book on the subject of PLATO!

      Delete
  4. Well I'm glad that we can day pedit5 was the first with a certain probability now simply because that means the very first is still accessible for us today.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Awesome to see this! And very convenient after I had just finished arranging the authors and program lists from the 1974 and 1977 PLATO program sheets. I found a number of unknown "Dungeon" authors that I intend on pursuing.

    Having just completed a documentary on Empire and finding out that John Daleske - really the father of the PLATO gaming scene - had just passed away, I'm renewing my initiative to get the oral and material history of as many PLATO games as possible. I'm happy to accept anybody's help if this initiative is of interest! And of course any RPG info will be passed straight along to here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It sounds like you came across the same sheet that El Explorador did. He spent most of the summer trying to track down each of those "Dungeon" authors, so it might be worth contacting him on his blog:

      https://exploradorrpg.wordpress.com/contacto/

      To avoid too much duplication of effort.

      Delete
    2. "Having just completed a documentary on Empire"

      May I ask which documentary did you watch? I have a great interest about the PLATO gaming scene and I'm sure this documentary would be a very valuable source of knowledge.

      Delete
    3. @Lucas Pinheiro Silva Click my name link and my latest video post, Play History Episode #6, covers video games from the first half of 1973. Empire is the last topic in that video. I am planning to cover Spasim and The Dungeon (pedit5) when I get there. (Still not certain about Moria, I'm not really convinced it was functional in 1975. But PLATO dates are a total mess)

      Delete
    4. @Lucas Eae Lucas, cool to see another BR interested in PLATO. If you wish to talk more about it, I do have access to Cyber1 and played some.

      Delete
  6. Exciting news for the history of videogames, guess the CRPG book will need to be expanded :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Chetlock Holmes and the Case of the Remade Plato Game

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh, that's really fascinating! Congratulations to everyone involved in this :)

    It's interesting that now things align with what Jon Peterson documented in his book "Playing at the World", where he mentions that the first report he found of CRPGs was in a letter from August 23, 1975, written to a hobbyist fanzine (Empire #21):

    "The basic idea is that you go into a dungeon, fight monsters and find treasures, and come out again. Each time you come out, you gain experience points based on the strength of opponents you killed and the value of treasure you found; there is a straight conversion of 1 gold piece = 1 experience point. The object is to accumulate 20,000 experience points and retire. The playing area is a 30x30 dungeon. However, I only found this out after about 10 hours of exploring; all you ever get to see on the screen is that part of the room/corridor that is 1 orthogonal step away from you.
    (...)
    An indication of its popularity can be found from the fact that you can only accumulate experience points by getting on a 15-name roster (otherwise it all evaporates when you come out and you have to build another hero). This roster never has an empty space on it for more than a minute. "

    The line about "collect 20,000 experience points and retire" is exactly how pedit5 introduces itself. Clearly the game was extremely popular, so if m199h had in fact come out in 1974, we would likely see this sort of written record about it as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jon Peterson's work on D&D history is incredible: exhaustively detailed but also a great read. His followup "The Elusive Shift" is all about how people actually played and thought about D&D and roleplaying in the mid 70s, drawn from the myriad fanzines which immediately sprouted up.

      I agree that if there were an earlier CRPG, some college kid would very likely have written about it at the time.

      Delete
    2. I hope they republish "playing at the world" sometime soon... copies are very expensive on the used market and Peterson's work is great!

      Delete
    3. @arthurdawg Jon has said that he plans to do an updated version of Playing at the World using the plethora of new resources that have been accrued since publication. No timetable on that as he's been caught up in a ton of projects, but I don't doubt he's working on it.

      Delete
    4. Excellent news indeed PlayHistory! I noticed that his blog has been pretty quiet this past year. I would love to see an expanded and revised edition.

      Delete
    5. That letter is a great supplement to this coverage, Felipe. Thanks for telling us about it.

      Delete
  9. "Every spell in Greyhawk" is quite an ambitious goal, since that supplement includes the totally open-ended Wish spell.

    Funny to think, if D&D had been published just a few years later, the first CRPG would probably have been written for the Apple II or another personal computer, and all this history might have survived intact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think dnd authors did something like the Wish spell (with a genie) by letting the player send his wish to the authors. I read some story in Cyber1 (if I remember well) about someone who made the wish to be an author himself, and the authors introduced a new book in the game "authored" by that player.

      Delete
    2. That's actually a really cool way to handle the wish spell that leverages the networked nature of the game. I mean it kinda sucks that they twisted that player's wish to be "an author", but also, that's just the kind of thing I'd expect a genie to do.

      Delete
    3. Not sure about other releases, but the BECMI edition of D&D (1983) openly encourages DMs to give a malicious interpretation of a Wishes when a player requests too much. Baldur's Gate 2 does the same.

      PS it's very nice to see this blog active again after September's pause. Thanks for your work, Addict!

      Delete
    4. Later editions recommended NOT being malicious unless the wisher tried for too much. Because otherwise the spell was worthless. And even then, to go for the path of least resistance.

      It took a while for the creators of the game to realize that working with the players made for a better game than working against them. Even Gary Gygax himself finally realized that although the ADVENTURE could be against the players, the GM should be at worst neutral.

      Also, that's for the spell. Working with an evil extraplanar creature for a wish deserved what you got.

      Delete
  10. I've tried the PLATO rpgs on Cyber1 and determined they are very much not my thing (did manage to beat "Pedit5" though). The history of them however? Since finding this blog PLATO games have become my first recent-history historical hyperfixation.

    I never expected any more information to come out about "m199h", it felt like the holy grail of PLATO games. And then this out of nowhere? Such an amazing surprise :)

    Props to Ruben for all the work put into this research.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I find this type of article fascinating, and really appreciate all the work you're all putting in!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I love historical content like this even more than the reviews of obscure 8-bit CRPGs! Thank-you for all of the effort.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I have already published the rest of the research that CRPG Addict started here on m199h, although it is in Spanish, but if something is not understood with the automatic translation, you just have to ask and I will translate it for you with other words that are understood.

    Thank you very much to everyone for your interest, and especially to Chet for giving me the opportunity to participate. We owe all the results of the research to him, who is the one who started it all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for focusing on this! It has long been one of my favorite real world mysteries. I just wish I had taken Spanish rather than Latin back in the day... One funny thing is that Google translate turns PLATO into dish which I found quite funny. It took me a moment!

      Delete
    2. To make it a bit easier to find El Explorador's articles on his Spanish-language website, they're here:

      https://exploradorrpg.wordpress.com/historia/

      Translated:
      https://exploradorrpg-wordpress-com.translate.goog/historia/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

      Delete
    3. Thanks so much Exploradorrpg for all your work tracking things down! It also inspired me to do a bit more poking around on Cyber1. I found the lesson "gchars" which was a storage place for many different people (including Daleske and Nakada) to store their game resources. It includes the "gryhwk" font (18 Sep 76) along with others called "battin" (20 Dec 76) and "moria" (27 Jan 77). The latter two both include the lion's face image seen in Daleske's dungeon and the pencil sketches for m199h.

      Delete
    4. In the case of "gchars" and "dungeon" there is an interesting Inspect mode turned on, where after typing in the lesson name, you can hit LAB (control-L) and view the resources. The resource viewer has a confusing interface, but there is help available. Basically, you use + and - to page through the Parts and select the Block you want to look at by hitting the letter corresponding to it. So you can find "gryhwk" by typing the lesson "gchars", then LAB, then +++, then c. You can inspect it with NEXT, then 1. I couldn't find completely official timestamps for the fonts -- those I gave earlier were entered as text in the "gameauths" resource.

      Delete
    5. For me it has been a pleasure and an honor to participate in this.

      "battin" must be the "chars" from the game O'Brien mentioned, which was probably an early version of "moria."

      Could it be that the dates are when the "chars" were included in "gchars" and not when they were created? Because if not, the date of "gryhwk" would not fit taking into account that "pedit5" uses the skeleton formed by its "chars" W, X, Y and Z.

      Delete
    6. Yes, these dates could well be from when they were added to this collection rather than when they were created. It is often difficult to know what to make of dates on PLATO games as some are free text (which might reflect memory or claiming priority) and those that are system date stamps sometimes reflect that the lesson was created a long time ago (when it wasn't yet an RPG) or that the lesson or resource had a minor but more recent modification. Yet they are still some of the best evidence of chronology that we have.

      Delete
    7. Great work, @Explorador! A real detective story with twists and turns. And in the end several new and interesting findings about the history of the earliest CRPGs.

      By the way, automatic translation seems to have improved somewhat. Using the second link provided by Bitmap above I checked the English translation after having read the original Spanish text and it even keeps "PLATO" and "moria" correctly instead of changing them to "plate/dish" and "[he/she/it] died" as had happened to Chet when sending another text of Rubén through a translation tool a while back. It's still a bit wobbly in some passages, but there seem to be very few sentences where the original sense is not understandable or even completely changed.

      Delete
    8. Thank you Busca! If you tell me the cases where the automatic translation gives not understandable sentences, I could change my original spanish words a bit to try to solve it.

      Delete
  14. I think this thing I'm calling 'inspect mode' could be important for further PLATO scholarship. It looks like there are a set of different permissions that the authors of a lesson can enable, where things like editing and inspecting are usually password protected, but the author can turn off the password for inspecting as was done in these cases. I presume it is possible for sysadmins on Cyber1 to enable inspect on other games of interest, such as "pedit5" to allow a games historian to look through (and screenshot) the relevant resources and timestamps. I'll try reaching out to them and see if I have any luck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would be really interesting. Please let us know if you get any results. Thank you!

      Delete
    2. I got an answer back: "The answer is no. The question has been asked many times and without specific permission from all of the authors, then the answer has to be no based on erring on the side of caution when it comes to copyright and intellectual property security." That seems reasonable to me, even if a bit disappointing. It does open up the slim future possibility of getting the admins to do it if we get the permission of that games author(s).

      Delete
    3. Which specific law could be infringed if the Cyber1 admins enabled this inspect mode on all of their PLATO software? If that enables others to view the content of the individual files of a program, isn't that the same as examining the files in the installation folder of any Windows game with an image viewer, hex editor, or file extractor?

      Examining images or programming scripts does not infringe on the author's copyright. But the act of enabling the inspect mode might be considered as removing a technical protection measure or similar. It's a shame that the legal system leaves people unsure about what is allowed and worried about potential legal action.

      Regarding the TUTOR programming language that the games are written in, is it a compiled or an interpreted programming language? If it's the latter, is it possible to use the inspect mode or an editing mode to read the source code of those PLATO programs where the Cyber1 admins (or the original authors) have set the permissions accordingly?

      From the description of the language and some statements in the document 'TUTOR's User's Memo', I get the impression that it's an interpreted language. There might be no technical hurdle (except for permissions) to read the source code or to edit it with the 'TUTOR editor'. And the TUTOR language seems to be easy to read.

      However, given that neither Explorador nor anyone else mentioned examining the source code, I might be mistaken. The only mention about source code was in Explorador's chapter 4:

      > "we must add that the authors of orthanc resurrected pedit5 on Cyber1 because they somehow had its source code , their game being an evolution of it with a very similar base (in principle they had Rutherford's permission to base their game on pedit5 , we don't know if using their code)."

      Hopefully one of you archaelogists or PLATO graybeards chimes in.

      Delete
    4. I also think that the language is likely to be interpreted, in part because the inspectable lessons seem to include code, which would be a bit more odd on a standard compiled program model. So we may actually be a single bit-flip away from seeing the code for pedit5 and other extant lessons. That said, that bit might be hard to flip for legal, moral, or social reasons. I think if I were running Cyber1 I'd probably be inclined to allow some kind of access for historical reasons, but as I said above, I also think their view isn't unreasonable. As well as possible legal issues, there is also a kind of social contract between the community of PLATO authors, to which those running Cyber1 belong. The authors had the opportunity to expose their programs' internals and instead chose not to. Respecting that choice has value.

      Delete
    5. I would note that at some point, the game is going to enter into the public domain. At least the original version. At some point, some 50 odd years from now, the game should go into the public domain, since the game should be under the 120 year rule as opposed to death of the author. The original version, if the people who put it up on the mainframe changed it that could create problems, as well as if the system was modified well into the '80s.

      Delete
    6. As far as I know, code inspection is not enabled for pedit5 on Cyber1. My reference to its source code is based on Rutherford's words to Matt Barton: "Other people had access to the code; I believe it may still exist in some form." And in the fact that Paul Resch (the author of orthanc) recovered it on Cyber1 and published in the notesfiles about it, saying at some point that there were files from 1974 (this may have been the date of creation of the lesson, before containing the game). I don't remember if it was him or Dirk Pellett (the author of dnd) who published part of his charset in which you can see the graphics of pedit5 mixed with those of m199h/dungeon.

      Delete
    7. I can't imagine how removing the protection to inspect timestamps and other such data wouldn't fall under the DMCA's exemptions for scholarship and research, but a bigger question is whether these programs were ever copyrighted to begin with, since before 1978 it was still necessary for a published work to have an affixed copyright notice—otherwise it was immediately considered in the public domain. The version of pedit5 available via Cyber1 doesn't appear to have any such notice, and in fact the first mention of the game in the PLATO system notes (from October 1975) asks "does anyone know who wrote pedit5," implying that Rutherford wasn't credited at all at that point. But this is the sort of thing that would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis and is complicated by the number of programs with later revisions that do have copyright notices (or were published in 1978 or later, when a notice was no longer required).

      Delete
    8. That is unfortunate. I know that copyright rules are important... but I don't think a scholarly survey would cause problems. These games are so old and obscure I can't imaging them every having commercial potential again. And... they probably all violate D&D copyrights, so there!

      Delete
    9. This is unfortunate given the opportunity to further pin down the history of the PLATO games! I can't imagine there would be any significant IP issues with a scholarly examination for such an old obsolete and largely forgotten system. The CRPG games probably all violate old TSR copyrights to some degree, so phbbbblllttt!!!

      Delete
  15. Fascinating stuff. That's closer than I thought anyone would ever get to an answer. Hats off to both you and Rubén. His article is excellent. That graphics set is amazing to see! Hopefully even more information will surface.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  17. These things seem sensitive to how CRPG is defined... I have seen some people refer to Star Trek (1971) as the first roguelike, apparently it has inspired Rogue. Also Oregon Trail (1971). I guess they do not match your definition, but some aspects are shared.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, but those games are clearly not RPGS. In an RPG your resources normally increase in the long run, in the form of improved attributes or skills, or accumulated equipment, while in those games it is about doing the best you can with limited initial resources, which normally do not increase, but rather which eventually reduce during the game, resulting in a kind of race against time. I can understand that roguelikes have some of this, but they also have the RPG component (you won't get very far if your resources don't increase) that Star Trek or Oregon Trail lack.

      Delete
  18. Can't believe I didn't saw this post back on Oct. This is amazing, can't describe how this is affecting my mind (in a positive way).

    ReplyDelete

I welcome all comments about the material in this blog, and I generally do not censor them. However, please follow these rules:

1. DO NOT COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY. If you do not want to log in or cannot log in with a Google Account, choose the "Name/URL" option and type a name (you can leave the URL blank). If that doesn't work, use the "Anonymous" option but put your name of choice at the top of the entry.

2. Do not link to any commercial entities, including Kickstarter campaigns, unless they're directly relevant to the material in the associated blog posting. (For instance, that GOG is selling the particular game I'm playing is relevant; that Steam is having a sale this week on other games is not.) This also includes user names that link to advertising.

3. Please avoid profanity and vulgar language. I don't want my blog flagged by too many filters. I will delete comments containing profanity on a case-by-case basis.

4. I appreciate if you use ROT13 for explicit spoilers for the current game and upcoming games. Please at least mention "ROT13" in the comment so we don't get a lot of replies saying "what is that gibberish?"

5. Comments on my blog are not a place for slurs against any race, sex, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or mental or physical disability. I will delete these on a case-by-case basis depending on my interpretation of what constitutes a "slur."

Blogger has a way of "eating" comments, so I highly recommend that you copy your words to the clipboard before submitting, just in case.

I read all comments, no matter how old the entry. So do many of my subscribers. Reader comments on "old" games continue to supplement our understanding of them. As such, all comment threads on this blog are live and active unless I specifically turn them off. There is no such thing as "necro-posting" on this blog, and thus no need to use that term.

I will delete any comments that simply point out typos. If you want to use the commenting system to alert me to them, great, I appreciate it, but there's no reason to leave such comments preserved for posterity.

I'm sorry for any difficulty commenting. I turn moderation on and off and "word verification" on and off frequently depending on the volume of spam I'm receiving. I only use either when spam gets out of control, so I appreciate your patience with both moderation tools.