Re: Talk about simulations.


28 Feb 1995 19:43:34 GMT

In article <GDR11.95Feb28161428@stint.cl.cam.ac.uk>,
Gareth Rees <gdr11@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>Jadrian Zun <zun@athena.mit.edu> wrote:
>> MOOs are great, however they are interpreted languages
>
>Interactive fiction
>
> * needs to be portable if it is to reach a large audience;

Not if you have a server on the Internet.

> * does not make heavy processing demands;

Outdated. Processing is cheap.

> * can't be released in source format (because most authors feel that
> letting players read the code would spoil the game for them).

This doesn't bar binary, encrypted, or otherwise munged distribution.

>Thus interpretation is an ideal solution.

For classic IF, I agree. For the future, why be so constrained?
In this day and age of gigabyte RAM, why are we still stuck with a 256k limit?

. . . Zun.