Ok this was pathetic . It moved the ME : and JJJ:
Lets try again
I have recently had a personal message conversation with JJJ . He didn’t seem to look at my suggestions when I asked him if the back button could be disabled . So I have decided to post a message on this forum . Here is what was said : ME : I don't think it is possible but can you disable the back button ? I would love it if you could . Only I saw a article that you wrote about quizes that you can't cheat on . I know how to hide the score thats not a problem . JJJ : Why would you do that? That's a terrible thing. If the player wants to cheat, let him! ME : That's ridiculous . Why would you want the player to cheat? . I think your just saying that because the editor can't do it , and your defending it. JJJ : No. We left it out of the editor on purpose. Otherwise we would have included the option to disable it. This isn't a gaming site, this is a site meant to pander to the nature of the CYOA storybook which never had restricted back options. ME : True but if we have the ability to why not ? Obviously you cant do that in a book , but why follow the tradition . Try something new . JJJ You're right, why are we even making CYOAs, we should create an all new idea instead. In all seriousness though, it actually is not in the spirit of the site to disallow the back button, It's there because this website is more about the story than the game. ME : Your right ! It's all about the story ! so lets get rid of link restrictions , variables , scripting , ratings , maturity levels ,Forums , comments , saves , points , and everything else we can think off . In fact lets just turn it into a ordinary story ! . (See I can be sarcastic too.) In all seriousness though, it actually is not in the spirit of the site to disallow CREATIVITY, It's there because this website needs it otherwise, its going to go to pot . We have to change with the times man! . People are less into reading and more into games . But obviously don't get rid of the reading . But ultimately if this website is to survive we need to change it . People don't necessarily like change but we might have to . Also as a side note I never knew you were a sarcastic person , I thought you were into facts . JJJ: Are you trying to tell me that a person can't be factual and sarcastic? That's pretty funny. The back-button is there because we, the administrators of the site, have decided that we don't want the authors to be able to make it impossible for the users of the site to not be able to go back to avoid unwelcome outcomes or the like. THAT is a fact. What you're talking about are not facts. Sentences like "In all seriousness though, it actually is not in the spirit of the site to disallow CREATIVITY" as if not allowing you to restrict the back button is putting a creative damper on you, are completely ridiculous and fallacious in nature. ME : I notice you completely ignored the last paragraph apart from the last sentence , that’s bad for starters . What I mean by this: "Are you trying to tell me that a person can't be factual and sarcastic? That's pretty funny." is that this is the first time I have seen you sarcastic. This is WRONG: The back-button is there because we, the administrators of the site, have decided that we don't want the authors to be able to make it impossible for the users of the site to not be able to go back to avoid unwelcome outcomes or the like. THAT is a fact. BECAUSE the administrators have a OPINION that the back button should be disabled . It's a group opinion that isn't a fact . A fact is a scientific proven statement . AND Allowing the back button is a limiting creativity because people can click on a link , see the writing then go back . This means hints and other information is given without consequence , such as a variable change . READ THE WHOLE POST this time. JJJ : What you said wasn't that it was the first time that I was sarcastic. What you said was that I was sarcastic and therefore not factual, which is of course, complete balderdash. They are not mutually exclusive. The fact lies in the fact that we have the opinion. I did not say that it's a fact that it doesn't limit creativity, what I said was that it's a fact that the administrators don't believe that it limits creativity, which is all that matters. What you just explained was that the readers could go ahead and read a page / witness variable changes. You still haven't explained how the fact that they can do that limits your creativity at all. This is a logical fallacy called non-sequitur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic) ME : "What you said wasn't that it was the first time that I was sarcastic. What you said was that I was sarcastic and therefore not factual, which is of course, complete balderdash. They are not mutually exclusive." Well a sarcastic fact is a very good fact is it? . "The fact lies in the fact that we have the opinion. I did not say that it's a fact that it doesn't limit creativity, what I said was that it's a fact that the administrators don't believe that it limits creativity, which is all that matters." It's not all that matters at all . That isn't a very democratic process is it? More authoritarian . Now that limits creativity for a start . Ideas and suggestions and possible flaws cannot be seen clearly if only the administrators are willing to look at the problems . If I (Or anybody else) cannot point out suggestions and ideas to you (being a administrator) without it even being considered then that’s not good. "What you just explained was that the readers could go ahead and read a page / witness variable changes. You still haven't explained how the fact that they can do that limits your creativity at all." I thought I made this quite clear . Let me try again . If a user can read text such as a hint and then press back they aren't suffering from reading the hint . If however the back button was disabled then users would have to click on the link . Therefore they could suffer such as a lower score then if they didn't click on it . This limits creativity because people are less likely to put hints in . Also other things could be effected that I haven't even thought of. I'm not really liking your attitude JJJ . You seem to dismiss everything I have to say without even considering it . I may just post a message on the forum instead . I will put the messages that I sent to you into them . What do you think? I didn’t really think I was getting anywhere with this so I posted it on this forum . 　 So what do you guys think ? Am I right or is JJJ right ? Before you answer I would like to highlight something which JJJ said which really annoyed me . "The fact lies in the fact that we have the opinion. I did not say that it's a fact that it doesn't limit creativity, what I said was that it's a fact that the administrators don't believe that it limits creativity, which is all that matters" Why should it matter only if the administrators think it matters ? So if all ordinary members thought something mattered but the administrators didn’t then tough ?
I have recently had a personal message conversation with JJJ . He didn’t seem to look at my suggestions when I asked him if the back button could be disabled . So I have decided to post a message on this forum . Here is what was said :
ME :
I don't think it is possible but can you disable the back button ? I would love it if you could . Only I saw a article that you wrote about quizes that you can't cheat on . I know how to hide the score thats not a problem .
JJJ :
Why would you do that? That's a terrible thing. If the player wants to cheat, let him!
That's ridiculous . Why would you want the player to cheat? . I think your just saying that because the editor can't do it , and your defending it.
No. We left it out of the editor on purpose. Otherwise we would have included the option to disable it. This isn't a gaming site, this is a site meant to pander to the nature of the CYOA storybook which never had restricted back options.
True but if we have the ability to why not ? Obviously you cant do that in a book , but why follow the tradition . Try something new .
JJJ
You're right, why are we even making CYOAs, we should create an all new idea instead. In all seriousness though, it actually is not in the spirit of the site to disallow the back button, It's there because this website is more about the story than the game.
Your right ! It's all about the story ! so lets get rid of link restrictions , variables , scripting , ratings , maturity levels ,Forums , comments , saves , points , and everything else we can think off . In fact lets just turn it into a ordinary story ! . (See I can be sarcastic too.) In all seriousness though, it actually is not in the spirit of the site to disallow CREATIVITY, It's there because this website needs it otherwise, its going to go to pot . We have to change with the times man! . People are less into reading and more into games . But obviously don't get rid of the reading . But ultimately if this website is to survive we need to change it . People don't necessarily like change but we might have to . Also as a side note I never knew you were a sarcastic person , I thought you were into facts .
JJJ:
Are you trying to tell me that a person can't be factual and sarcastic? That's pretty funny. The back-button is there because we, the administrators of the site, have decided that we don't want the authors to be able to make it impossible for the users of the site to not be able to go back to avoid unwelcome outcomes or the like. THAT is a fact. What you're talking about are not facts. Sentences like "In all seriousness though, it actually is not in the spirit of the site to disallow CREATIVITY" as if not allowing you to restrict the back button is putting a creative damper on you, are completely ridiculous and fallacious in nature.
I notice you completely ignored the last paragraph apart from the last sentence , that’s bad for starters . What I mean by this: "Are you trying to tell me that a person can't be factual and sarcastic? That's pretty funny." is that this is the first time I have seen you sarcastic. This is WRONG: The back-button is there because we, the administrators of the site, have decided that we don't want the authors to be able to make it impossible for the users of the site to not be able to go back to avoid unwelcome outcomes or the like. THAT is a fact. BECAUSE the administrators have a OPINION that the back button should be disabled . It's a group opinion that isn't a fact . A fact is a scientific proven statement . AND Allowing the back button is a limiting creativity because people can click on a link , see the writing then go back . This means hints and other information is given without consequence , such as a variable change . READ THE WHOLE POST this time.
What you said wasn't that it was the first time that I was sarcastic. What you said was that I was sarcastic and therefore not factual, which is of course, complete balderdash. They are not mutually exclusive. The fact lies in the fact that we have the opinion. I did not say that it's a fact that it doesn't limit creativity, what I said was that it's a fact that the administrators don't believe that it limits creativity, which is all that matters. What you just explained was that the readers could go ahead and read a page / witness variable changes. You still haven't explained how the fact that they can do that limits your creativity at all. This is a logical fallacy called non-sequitur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)
"What you said wasn't that it was the first time that I was sarcastic. What you said was that I was sarcastic and therefore not factual, which is of course, complete balderdash. They are not mutually exclusive." Well a sarcastic fact is a very good fact is it? . "The fact lies in the fact that we have the opinion. I did not say that it's a fact that it doesn't limit creativity, what I said was that it's a fact that the administrators don't believe that it limits creativity, which is all that matters." It's not all that matters at all . That isn't a very democratic process is it? More authoritarian . Now that limits creativity for a start . Ideas and suggestions and possible flaws cannot be seen clearly if only the administrators are willing to look at the problems . If I (Or anybody else) cannot point out suggestions and ideas to you (being a administrator) without it even being considered then that’s not good. "What you just explained was that the readers could go ahead and read a page / witness variable changes. You still haven't explained how the fact that they can do that limits your creativity at all." I thought I made this quite clear . Let me try again . If a user can read text such as a hint and then press back they aren't suffering from reading the hint . If however the back button was disabled then users would have to click on the link . Therefore they could suffer such as a lower score then if they didn't click on it . This limits creativity because people are less likely to put hints in . Also other things could be effected that I haven't even thought of. I'm not really liking your attitude JJJ . You seem to dismiss everything I have to say without even considering it . I may just post a message on the forum instead . I will put the messages that I sent to you into them . What do you think?
I didn’t really think I was getting anywhere with this so I posted it on this forum .
　
So what do you guys think ? Am I right or is JJJ right ?
Before you answer I would like to highlight something which JJJ said which really annoyed me .
"The fact lies in the fact that we have the opinion. I did not say that it's a fact that it doesn't limit creativity, what I said was that it's a fact that the administrators don't believe that it limits creativity, which is all that matters"
Why should it matter only if the administrators think it matters ? So if all ordinary members thought something mattered but the administrators didn’t then tough ?
Because I cannot put variable changes into the back button . Even if I could I might not want too .
I understand your frustration but in general, I don't think the go back button should be able to be disabled. Let's say your playing a game such as, lets say Homo Perfectus 2 as I know we're both familiar with tha game. Then lets say you're in the fimal battle with Damage, and you die. The go back button is disabled, so after half an hour of playing (I think a playthrough of HP2 is about 30 min), your story comes to an abrupt ending and your only option is to start over. Personally, I would be pissed off, give the game a severly lower rating than I should and leave.
Why though . If you needed to you could place a previous page link . Yourself . Complete with variable changes , restrictions and any other thinks you wish to include in the link . The back button however doesn't allow me to do any of that . Whats the point of setting up links and whatnot if the user can just use the back button . It's annoying to me as a creator .
What you need to do is change the function of your 'punishment' so the reader isn't aware of it.
Based on the compromise I have stated below, the back button wouldn't have to be disabled during this page/ game. Only in certain games that the author feels it is necessary. Even then you could save the game. Then if the game was still frustrating you could give the story a lower rating, just like you said. People who abused the back disabling tool would obviously have a worse off game and suffer accordingly. What I am most confused about is why do you accept my frustration as an author but refuse to accept my solution. Can you think of a better one?
I think JJJ was saying the "all that matters" part in reference to what's a fact and what's not, not in reference to administrator's opinions being the only thing that matter. I don't think JJJ would dismiss a member's concern so easily and from the PM conversation he hasn't. I think it'd help if JJJ explained a bit more about why not having a back button is not in the spirit of the site, I see where you're coming from there, but personally I'd have to agree with JJJ here.
Like the person a post or two up from me said - not being able to go back after abrupt endings to stories would just be irritating. When people read CYOA books and they stuff up and die, they're likely to just go back one step and see if things had been different if they chose a different option, not re-read the entire thing from the start. I get your concern with the whole cheating thing and that people using the back button means, in your example, that their score isn't reduced, but seriously if somebody wanted to they could just keep replaying the game until they get the score that they want, the only difference here being that instead of playing through the whole game they only go back one square.
Explain your point more and I might be inclined to agree with you, but right now I don't see how not having the option to disable the back button limits creativity or inconveniences anybody (mainly the second point). Could you tell me how not having a back button inconveniences you (keeping in mind with the score-on-quizzes thing that people can replay until they get the score they want and removing the back button only inconveniences them)?
*how not having the ability to remove the back button inconveniences you?
It also limits the realisticness of the story. Lets say you read something and because you have read something, you get put into danger. Not killed but danger. But because you have read the information it allows you to go somewhere using a link. But they could have also done that without the link and the danger. You cannot remove or restrict the link if they haven't been through the danger path because you need the other users who could have done it without the danger to be able to click on it. But then how do tell if they went through the danger path or not? They click the link to progress the story but it has no impact on wheather they went through danger or not. This is really really really hard to explain.
Note : Whether
I personally like the back button. I agree with the above posters about it being a life saver when you play a long game and then come to an abrupt ending. It would really make be po'ed if I had to start the whole game over again based on one death. I remember the old CYOA books and I'm sure some of you do too. The same applied to them. When I flipped to a page where I died, I didn't begin the book all over again. I just went back to the previous page. I understand you don't like allowing the reader to cheat, but cheating has been a part of CYOA's forever.
I don't know if its going to move my post around, so this is directed at spartan008. More specifically this bit:
"I understand you don't like allowing the reader to cheat, but cheating has been a part of CYOA's forever."
Why should it be though. Surely this allows the reader to dodge punishment making the story in some cases unrealistic. I have tried to explain this below.
I'm not really replying to this, I just wanted to be at the bottom. It's not that I didn't wait to post your message, I didn't receive your message when I posted it on the forum. You weren't even online. As people seem to disagree with me for some reason or another, YET people have mentioned cheating could have occurred, why don't we stop it? Just because it has always occurred why should we let it carry on? Seems silly. How about a compromise then? As people have mentioned they like the back button yet cheating can occur why can't we disable it on certain pages? Then we can leave the back button on pages like death, but remove it when we want to. It's all about giving more power to the creator but not overusing it. I'm sure you would like this feature but you haven't really thought about how this could benefit your story's / future ones. Surely this is reasonable?
I'm not really replying to this, I just wanted to be at the bottom. It's not that I didn't wait to post your message, I didn't receive your message when I posted it on the forum. You weren't even online.
As people seem to disagree with me for some reason or another, YET people have mentioned cheating could have occurred, why don't we stop it? Just because it has always occurred why should we let it carry on? Seems silly.
How about a compromise then? As people have mentioned they like the back button yet cheating can occur why can't we disable it on certain pages? Then we can leave the back button on pages like death, but remove it when we want to. It's all about giving more power to the creator but not overusing it. I'm sure you would like this feature but you haven't really thought about how this could benefit your story's / future ones. Surely this is reasonable?
There is nothing on death pages that indicates it is death except the page says so and it has an end game link, at least in most cases. Besides, having the go back link only on those could do nothing, what if the decision that sealed the reader's doom was made three pages ago? Again, if you're going to say that the go back button should be manditory then we're back on square one and you need to read Sethaniel's post. It would open up a giant doorway for authors who want to make it exceptionally difficult for the reader.
Bradhal, what you need to do is just keep in mind that this button excist and have all your future storygames function as such that cheating becomes virtually impossible or useless.
"I can see that you're not replying to my post. That much is obvious. If you were to reply to it (or at least read it) then you would notice that your argument is pretty weak. Your compromise is useless. Go re-read Sethaniel's post."
True at that time I was asleep, so couldn't reply. The compromise is useless only in your opinion. I have re-read sethaniels post.
Also, when did we decide that using the back button was "cheating?"
Right Here, Quote from JJJ :
2. We've mentioned that cheating occurs and that WE'RE FINE WITH IT. This is a storygame website, not a flashgame website. But even then, people put cheat codes in their games.
Also in other places I think but I can't copy them all.
Several of my stories were written with the intent/expectation that the reader would choose to go back and try other options (esp. Firebird and its sequel.)
Ok. thats great for you.
Reply to Zikara.
"You just need to learn how to let go of control."
Well not being able to put certain things into my story, bug me. I also think unless you are put into a situation where you want to put something in but can't because of the layout of the website/ editor, your not really going to understand.
"If you keep ending up getting an attitude with the people you decide to ask for help from, then you're going to end up finding a lot less people helping you."
I have explained this in reply to JJJ's post. It is not my fault I got annoyed at some of JJJ's remarks, surely it is JJJ's fault? Why should I just accept JJJ's remarks and not tell him so? If you were annoyed at the way JJJ or anybody else said something to you, would you just ignore it?
Why is it 3J's fault that you are easily annoyed, from what I read, you explained you point, he refuted and explained his, you did the same, he did the same, untill eventually you got a severe attitude, which justifies 3J acting similarly (I did detect some attitude from 3J, but not nearly as much). I realize that you havn't read my "don't have think skin" reference, but blaming someone else for your own tolerance problems is just plain rude. And you might want to actually think about Zikara's post, not only are you getting an attitude with 3J (please read my earlier comment about being childish), you are also doing the same to the people posting in the forum, just because they are voicing their opinions, and isn't that what you said you were trying to do?
Going to have to agree with JJJ here. Whether or not you have a consensus, there probably was one to implement it in the first place, and it wasn't purely based on the decision of the admins either, probably. So instead of asking why we should disable it, maybe you should ask why it was there in the first place? I mean, players could have made back links then too, so why would they still need a go back button? Easy, they unanimously agree that players can exploit that especially if you get trapped on one of those unending storygames or if players get frustrated over not having one for when they want one. Aside from that, it is also a lot of work for the code writers, not to mention annoying for authors who has to check, click or write a code for inserting the back button.
Too much hassle, too little use, unrealistic.
I'm gonna side with 3J. The button makes the game quite enjoyable (I think that Sethaniel also posted a good argument for this but I can't remember it), and when your trying to make a debate try not to condescend to or insult the opponent, It just makes you look childish, especially if you decide to post it in a forum for all to see. Also sarcasm does not make a fact invalid, it actually can make a point more powerful through understatement or understatement (which are two commonly used and accepted methods in debate) as long as you are not using it to slander or otherwise insult your opponent. And really, a go back button doesn't hamper creativity, it actually gives you better reviews (refer to SindriV's comment). I also don't actually think it takes away from the realisticness (don't know the actual term) of the story, chances are if you are writing a story like the Homo Perfectus trilogy, chances are it's not going to be realistic in the first place, but it is still a good story. There's nothing wrong with voicing your opinion, just try to do so in a civil and cooperative manner.
understatement and overstatement*
Reply to ThisisBo
"chances are if you are writing a story like the Homo Perfectus trilogy, chances are it's not going to be realistic in the first place"
As someone at sometime pointed out to me(might be sindriv, but really not sure), there is a difference between realistic and beleivability . He/she explained it a whole lot better than I can, but generally assuming aliens and such exist, it has to be realistic so that if aliens and whatnot existed it makes sense.
"There's nothing wrong with voicing your opinion, just try to do so in a civil and cooperative manner."
I try my best.
"when your trying to make a debate try not to condescend to or insult the opponent, It just makes you look childish, especially if you decide to post it in a forum for all to see."
I have allready explained I never ment to insult JJJ, But I felt I had to post on the forum, to understand the situation. JJJ himself has said this is fine so no harm done.
I encourage you to look around, posts are everywhere and in the wrong order. But I have put quotes on all of my replies except one(Whoops!).
I think that was me as well as I say that a lot. Generally what I mean is that I look at stories as alternative universes where there is something different than in ours (it's the future, it's the past, people have connections to magical sources etc.) and technically that can be believable. (Brace yourself, this example is going to take a while) Recently, I watched the movie Thor, a superhero movie about a god, and later after that I saw a movie named Ben Hur, which occurs during the Roman era in Jerusalem (actually it was hinted that it occurred during Christ's crucifixion). In Ben Hur, the protagonist is watching a parade going by his house where a horde of Roman guards are escorting a nobleman throughout Jerusalem and it goes past the Ben Hur's house. At that very moment, a shard from the balconies Ben Hur was standing on (and actually the part his hand was positioned on) breaks away and lands exactly on the nobleman, causing the Romans to kill Ben Hur's family and crucify him. Just because of this scene, I found Thor more believeable, which was about aliens (they were kind of aliens) using magic, because the odds of all of those things occurring at the same time is so slim that I would rather believe in the existance of magic than believe that would happen.
There is a misunderstanding, about which post we are talking about. True I didn't wait to post this:
"Here was my last response that he didn't wait to post: Feel free to post anything you want. "Well a sarcastic fact is a very good fact is it? . " What? Th" ...... ect...
Because when I posted it onto the forum I never had it. It was only later when the forum post had allready been made that you replied. I was just migrating the conversation from personal message to forum, to see what other people thought. I also asked you if I should, sent the message, then decided it was well within my right to do so, and you haven't minded so no harm done.
"2. We've mentioned that cheating occurs and that WE'RE FINE WITH IT. This is a storygame website, not a flashgame website. But even then, people put cheat codes in their games."
Thats ok then. I'm not going to demand it gets implemented if i'm the only one who wants it lol.
"I'm going to be rejecting this feature proposal at some point."
Well if you do so, I do want it to be a group adminstror decesion. I don't want it to be just you JJJ. That would be a little biased. Also If the administrators as a group decided no, then I request that they move the forum post into another area of the website to continue the descussion, rather than closing it so nobody can post.
The point which I believe you have to defend is what benefit will you, the author, gain from eliminating the use of the back button? To me, it's the equivalent of giving someone a book you've written and then telling them they have to read it a certain way. I can't see how people cheating by using the back button is any inconvenience to you, and in regards to gaming, unless it's multiplayer (which storygames are not) then the player cheating is not doing anyone harm.
(That, and the non-damaging type of cheating has the potential to make the player's experience that much better. Could you imagine Pokémon Red without the rare candy cheat?)
Ok this is going to take a while. I have about 8 ,9 posts to read. Why do you have to post at the same time! I'm going to work my way through replying to each post.
People have did in fact mention that cheating has occured, but they also said (which you so handily left out) that they were ok with it, because it is a story, not an actual game where your success lies in your ability. Also, if your compromise was accepted, the author could choose not to put it in places where people actually need it. Could you imagine playing OMS without a go back button?
"I'd also like to point out in my defence, that both times that the hostility levels were escalated, it wasn't on my part. It happened here: "That's ridiculous . Why would you want the player to cheat? . I think your just saying that because the editor can't do it , and your defending it." and here: "Your right ! It's all about the story ! so lets get rid of link restrictions , variables , scripting , ratings , maturity levels ,Forums , comments , saves , points , and everything else we can think off . In fact lets just turn it into a ordinary story ! . (See I can be sarcastic too.) "
I never meant to increase hostility levels. I was just saying what I thought, in reply to the arguments. If I offended you JJJ I certainly didn't mean to and it wasn't in my interest to do so. I just felt you were a little unresponsive in your arguments dismissing my arguments straight away, just because of your opinion. I therefore thought I should post to the forum and see what other people thought. Also YOU were the first person to be sarcastic and I was just replying in the same manor. I also don't like to beat around the bush and say what I think without too much waffle, but never offend anybody.
Well sarcasm isn't always a bad thing, and although you didn't mean to increase hostility levels, you certainly did so. And again, It's just sarcasm, like my JROTC drill instructor wouldn't stop saying, "Don't have thin skin", which is a way of saying that you shouldn't be so easily offended, especially if you got yourself into it in the first place. like joining the rotc for example lol.
HHmm big post.
"Do you mean a fact delivered by sarcasm? In which case, it's the exact same fact as if it wasn't delivered by sarcasm."
I personally don't know why we are going on about sarcasm and facts in the first place. This doesn't have much to do with the back button only how you structure a possible argument / counter argument ect. But I'm going to answer anyway because I always like to reply to every post. Basically in my opinion a sarcastic fact wouldn't be good. Surely it is best to say it as it is normally? Put it blunt rather than beating around the bush?
"You have a point here but when it comes to simply opinion vs opinion (or rather, I've given support for my opinion but you haven't given strong support) then it's going to go with the administrators. Essentially, if you want something to change, then you need to convince the admins and we've been really really good about this. There are many, many changes to the site that we didn't originally condone but all you've been saying is that "you're limiting creativity!" but that doesn't make any sense as I'll point out in a second."
I am trying to convince the admins. That's why I posted it in this forum.
"lol. Alright, I'm going to try and say this nicely: This is one of the worst arguments ever. I'm going to rephrase what you wrote: "You should disable the back button because you're discouraging authors from putting hints in their storygames and that is limiting creativity. PLUS THERE MIGHT BE OTHER THINGS I HAVEN'T EVEN THOUGHT OF." Why is that so hard to understand or accept as a valid argument? I'm easily not the best writer and haven't been on the site that long. I just found something I thought was annoying and was trying to explain why.
"This is irrelevant. Whether or not authors want to put hints in their storygames does not really matter. Storygames with hints aren't necessarily better than storygames without. The very premise of your argument is flawed. Another non-sequitur."
You mean it doesn't matter to you. If I feel my story would be incomplete without a hint, I feel it would be imcomplete.
"Storygames with hints aren't necessarily better than storygames without"
Yes I agree here.
I would also like to say, I hope people are expressing there true opinions on this, rather than just siding with JJJ, because he is an administrator or whatnot. Please give my views consideration. I have replied to most posts above, I think. I apologise if I missed anybody out, it took quite a while.
I'm not siding with JJJ for any other reason that I believe he is right in this particular debate. Anything else is irrelevant.
Ya, you can't just say everyone is siding with 3J just because they like him more than you. Sometimes you just have to admit that other people think that someone else's argument is better.
And to all the new readers who are confused out of their minds, this is not a straight-forward forum, Bradhal (I think that is his username) is just responding to each of our arguments individually, which I agree with, rather than address them all in a super-long post at the bottom. I also did the same, so don't just think we are ignoring each other's arguments and posting something that we've already talked about, because we didn't at the time lol.
I'm just going to repeat what I said: Too much hassle, too little use, unrealistic.
I'm replying to the post which starts with ...
"Alright bradhal, you made a plethora of replies, which is nice of you" ect...
I don't understand your post. You have said I have posted X,Y,Z when they are really your words. I quoted you, and now your quoting me, quoting you lol. You have also put quotes around "just accept my argument, it's good" but I never actually said this.
This is dam right confusing what with posts and replyes everywhere. I could put it all into one massive post but that would be insane. Also when I copy from word to the editor it goes mental. Zikara has hit the nail on the head. I don't really want to disable the back button but I want to have a effective hint system, that you can't cheat on. I'm not sure how this could be implemented but I would love it if somebody could figure it out. I'm sure it would be useful for others as well as me.
For those who don't understand what he means when he says hint (as hints come in many forms) he means that during a puzzle, if the reader takes too longto solve it and is clearly stuck, a hint will become available but taking it means lowered score. Just for those that don't know what he's referencing for, as said before, hints and hints aren't necessarily the same thing.
I decided to reply to top message to have this be at the bottom.
Bradhal says: As someone at sometime pointed out to me(might be sindriv, but really not sure), there is a difference between realistic and beleivability . He/she explained it a whole lot better than I can, but generally assuming aliens and such exist, it has to be realistic so that if aliens and whatnot existed it makes sense.
I think that was me as well as I say that a lot. Generally what I mean is that I look at stories as alternative universes where there is something different than in ours (it's the future, it's the past, people have connections to magical sources etc.) and technically that can be believable, because our current universe would be just as unbelievable for them as the other way around.
(Brace yourself, this example is going to take a while) Recently, I watched the movie Thor, a superhero movie about a god, and later after that I saw a movie named Ben Hur, which occurs during the Roman era in Jerusalem (actually it was hinted that it occurred during Christ's crucifixion). In Ben Hur, the protagonist is watching a parade going by his house where a horde of Roman guards are escorting a nobleman throughout Jerusalem and it goes past the Ben Hur's house. At that very moment, a shard from the balconies Ben Hur was standing on (and actually the part his hand was positioned on) breaks away and lands exactly on the nobleman, causing the Romans to kill Ben Hur's family and crucify him. Just because of this scene, I found Thor more believeable, which was about aliens (they were kind of aliens) using magic, because the odds of all of those things occurring at the same time is so slim (the parade going past HIS HOUSE at the very same time the stone that is loose (which is obviously uncommon or the houses would fall apart within weeks) falls down, and even if those things occur at the same time, odds of the stone hitting the nobleman are still very, very slim) that I would rather believe in the existance of magic than believe that would happen.
Sensible means that the characters and environments react realistically according to whatever situation they are in, be it fictional or not.
Aww, deadly_sinner, I can't call you dilbert-dude anymore!
YOU WANT your readers to get what THEY WANT dont you? because if they get what they want, then you get what you want, a game people can actually enjoy. all the creativity in the world doesnt matter if your story is no fun because everytime i make a mistake i take the fun out of the game, or i have to start all over. additionally what happens if someone accidentally hits the wrong link? oww man, now i have to start all over... or not, i'll just read something else that will forgive me for mistakes. (ive read nearly every post on this subject, none the less sorry if ive hit on points that you guys have allready stated.)
Ugilick, your spelling, capitalization, and grammar is killing me.
As long as they are reading your story, be happy. Most of the cheaters are trying to experience all the content in one bout. :)
I give up . Can't understand it personally but I have been outvoted. Anywhere else cheating would be bad but here it is what everybody wants. Mental. Well I guess I won't be doing any hints with consequences anymore.
It's not what everybody wants, I think most of us are just rather neutral when it comes to cheating. It doesn't bother us.
Brad, it's not that we want it. We don't care about it. I speak for myself, and I'm sure people agree, that we are most interested in our stories being read. I'm writing a story that is going to be rated an eight on length at the moment. I would be surprised if people didn't use the back button. To have an honest vote in the contest, you will have to have read the stories thoroughly (atleast I will, can't vouch for errybody), and rather than wasting time and giving yourself loads more work, you could use the back button. I'm sorry "abuse" of the back button makes you mad, but it is something that won't be changed, as 3J said.
Respect his authoritah!
mmm south park.
But i'm not talking about games really. I was thinking more general, like tests or exams. You wouldn't cheat in that would you? Well okay you might, but it wouldn't be morally right.
Lets not regenerate old troubles from long past, its unneeded. his request is denied, why continue to debate the point?
Maybe Bradhal wants to convince JJJ to change his mind.
On the contrary, I think it's great that JJJ replied to bradhal. Just because the suggestion's been denied doesn't mean we should all ignore him.
What benefit would an author gain from restricting people from using the back button?
He wants to have a hint feature, where, after a few tries at one of his puzzles, a hint becomes available for the price of score. But with the back button, this is of course easily avoidable as anyone can just look at the hint and use go back to go to the point where he has his full score, but still has the knowledge the hint held.
well then endmaster is right, even disabling the back button would not stop them from cheating that system.
Yes, but how does the author get any benefit from deterring "cheaters" (mind you, even with the back button disabled somebody could just continue playing through the game again and again until they got the score they wanted)? I don't see how somebody completing the storygame by using the back button and posting with a superior score at the end inconveniences anyone.
I don't either. But this is his story, at least I think so. He'll just have to confirm that when he returns.
I doubt there are lots of people that would misuse this, but there are definately some, and that's too much to be tolerated. Also, think of the rookies who think this will be a good idea to make the game more difficult or something, and don't realize it causes the reader to just leave without finishing the story.
I could put a quiz tag on any of my games, whether they actually are quizes or not.
JJJ would remove it if it wasn't a quiz.
Also, JJJ, what if you can have a variable increase or decrease when every single link is clicked, including "go back". So you could have the score decrease the more links are clicked, and so the more the go back button is used, the lower the score is. Having this result in an abrupt ending because of the go back link is impossible, or so it seems to me. If you see how that can still be implemented, I would like to hear of it.
that is an interesting suggestion.
People could counteract this. Just say you wanted %VARIABLE, to be decreased by 1 for every link (including back) clicked. You could easily set %VARIABLE so it starts at 1, then for every link script (or the global link script) you set the variable to 1, so every time you click on a link %VARIABLE is set to 1, which cancels out the decrease in %VARIABLE for everything except when you click the back button. So when you click the back button, %VARIABLE is decreased to 0 which through scripting could send the player to a page which essentially doesn't let them go back in the story at all, which more or less disables the back button.
tl;dr People would still be able to disable the back button through this.
I cant beleive that didnt occur to me. your a deviouse one October.
...which no one would read because once a dead end is reached, quitting is the only option.
we are allso missing the point that this would put an even bigger load on 3J. to have to monitor rather or not people are abusing the back button.
Setting strict rules does not constitute as cheating the readers.
Have you read any of this thread? any of it at all?
"Also, we're not disabling the back button on quizzes. Same principles. And how would we program it so that if I removed the quiz tag, it would remove only the scripts on back buttons without screwing everything up? What if they had a global everything (including back button) script, it would have to comb through and change that. Way too much work."
-3J
"Also, we're not disabling the back button on quizzes." -3J
That is until they comment and see their score I assume. Having a quiz where there is no way of seeing whether you are right or not is...I'll leave it at odd.
You'd have a page at the end of the quiz saying which questions you got wrong and which you got right before submitting your comment, rather than after each individual question.
But honestly, who really wants to cheat on a quiz? Who goes back and answers every question right to get a perfect score? And more importantly, why would an author care if a player did that?
I don't know. I'm not much into quizes. Maybe I should make one, just to see how it's done. Anyway, I agree that people should be free to cheat, especially when it is in something that essentially doesn't matter (such as cheating in a video game, rather than cheating on a test)
I cannot beleive im doing this, but its time to kick a dead horse. What if we have it set up to where the system counts the never of times the reader uses the back button, then displays it at the end next to the score?
