Re: That's not important - leave it alone.
Sat, 30 Dec 1995 11:42:17 -0500
jools@arnod.demon.co.uk (Julian Arnold) writes:
> "Andrew C. Plotkin" (erkyrath+@CMU.EDU) wrote:
> > In Inform, actually, I've been doing a lot of objects which are one
> > step above "You don't need to refer to that object." I create a
> > scenery object whose before property is
> > [ "That's out of reach."; ]
> > or some other slightly individualized string. Maybe "Don't hassle
> > that." or "That belongs to the vendor, don't wreck it." It's there,
> > but you can't do anything to it.
>
> This seems to be one of the better approaches, but I'd think you'd want to be
> a bit careful.
>
> For instance,
> >GET SECURITY CAMERA
> That's out of reach.
> ["Hm," thinks the player, "what can I do to get it in reach?"]
True. I was thinking in terms of a castle on the horizon, or something
at the top of a forty-foot pillar.
On the other hand, as an author, I *like* putting in things like a
security camera that's out of reach, which the player will simply
never be able to reach. Why should it be obvious which items are
soluble puzzles? :)
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."