From: sl8nl@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: Game libraries...
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:43:37 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

> What are your credentials?  What are Josh's?  Throughout the years

We've both published commercial programs before.  I'm working with
a certain person from SSI on some new ideas.  I've released tons
of source and shareware/freeware stuff to the public domain.  I've
had 11 years of experience with my computers through the years.  Yes,
I was 5 when I started.

I'll have you know that programmers in Europe even blow me away.  I 
saw a 12-year-old kid visiting the states turn out a program that
would have taken me hours to comprehend, let alone program.  It rotated
a whole bunch of objects in a 3d space environment.  All assembly. 
Except for the graphics, it took him all of a half hour to program.

> people with no real experience have claimed all sorts of ridiculous
> things that professionals have discounted.  I base my opinions on the
> experience I've had co-writing a graphics game design system for the
> Atari since around 1986, and on my extensive use of TADS to produce
> full-length text adventures.  These things don't make me an end-all
> be-all authority, but I do feel that working on them has given me a
> fairly good understanding of game programming, as well as programming
> in general.

Same here...I'd say we're even.

> experience.  If you work something out that's innovative I don't care
> whether you've been working for Atari Games for the past 20 years or
> whether you just sat down at a computer for the first time today.  Josh
> has neither credentials (as far as we know) nor evidence to suggest
> that he knows what he's talking about w.r.t. TADS or any other
> substantial text adventure development system.)

There's more than enough source on the market out there written by me
to act as evidence...find it and see.

> And really, should anyone expect to come into an international forum
> and make an incredible claim without being taken to task?  I'm still
> waiting to see any evidence that Josh's claims are true -- it's easy to
> toot your own horn without ever substantiating anything.

Its being posted as soon as I upload it.  And no, it's not being posted
to prove that you don't believe.  People have a right to their own 
opinions, and if somebody came into a conference and started making
outlandish claims, then I would probably start asking questions, too.

> Furthermore, I *really* don't see why you think I'm "jealous."  I'm
> perfectly happy with what I've accomplished and my capabilities in
> general.   Just because I don't go spouting off about how smart I am or
> how wonderful the things I've done are (or how young or old I am)

Did you see me spouting off how smart I am or how wonderful the things 
I've done are (or how young or old I am).  When I posted the response,
I included a full explanation of how it was done...and even expanded to
pseudo-code last night before the message was accidently aborted.

> doesn't mean I don't have anything to back my claims up with.  For all
> you know I could be 16 years old too.  For all you know I could have
> written the texture mapping code for Ultima Underworld.  (No, neither
> is true.)

If it were, I think I would sit back and let you do all the explaining.

> Don't assume that just because you think someone's incredibly talented
> that no one else could be as well.  What you eventually find is that
> *lots* of people are incredibly talented. On a net with an estimated 5
> million readers it should come as no surprise that lots of incredibly
> talented people read rec.games.programmer.  For God's sake, the person
> who wrote Marble Madness for the Sega posts here, and I'm sure he's not
> alone here in making substantial contributions to the computer gaming
> world.

We know.  It's always an asset to have people like that on here to ask
questions.  Fortunately, that person's been very helpful, and so has
Mark Iuzzolino (sp?) from Ashgon.  I start to help out, and I get pounced
on.

> So jealous, no.  Skeptical, yes.  Very skeptical.  Anyone can post a
> message saying they've writen Ultima Undeworld in 18K, but don't expect
> me to believe it without some kind of evidence; writing a system

Same here.  It can't be done in 18k.

> similar to TADS in 18K and two weeks is equally ridiculous.  That's
> something that I hope would be immediately obvious to anyone who's
> even taken a cursory glance at TADS.

I won't answer this...I already have!  I also didn't say two weeks,
I said three.

> Similarly, if you tell me you've written a game design system like TADS
> in two weeks, I *know* we're not talking about the same thing when we
> say "game design system."  That was the *entire* point of my followup
> to Josh.

I posted how my game design system worked.  TADS is much more structured,
kinda like comparing Pascal to C (my game designer).

> Or it could just be that you don't know what you're talking about either.

Maybe nobody in the world knows what they're talking about??? Huh?

> All I said was that a) I don't believe his claims, b) I'd love to be
> convinced otherwise by seeing some real code and executables to back
> the claims up, and c) I don't think Josh and I are on the same
> wavelength when it comes to what we're talking about.

We were talking about texture mapping right?  My definition.  Mapping
an image onto a surface (not necessarily flat)...Say, mapping a wall
image onto a pillar.  Perspective mapping:  Mapping an image down onto
a flat plane.

> It's great that you respect Josh so much and that you're such good
> friends.  But guess what?  There are plenty of smart, hard-working
> people in the world.  The fact remains that you won't convince anyone
> of anything just on the basis of your intelligence.  Show me what
> you've *done*, don't just talk about it.

I don't think that's the point.  Who cares whether someone has an
IQ of 400 and someone else on the net has 20.  I don't think people
care to read these types of messages...basically, getting of the
subject entirely...like the C-Pascal debates.

[paragraph deleted...repetitive]

> magnitude into account.  Josh is *not* 10,000 times faster or more
> clever than Mike Roberts.

Who said I was?  He merely said I turned things out fast.

>>He is completely self- taught and so at times he uses words which in
>>the business are not the actual denotation.  He also is only 16 (as of
>>August) years old!
> 
> Ah, well now we're getting down to it, aren't we?  These revelations
> are no surprise, frankly.

Getting down to what?

>>	Now in all honesty, some of the things Josh claims to have done may
>>seem fanciful dreams but for the most part are pretty good assessments of 
>>what he is doing.
> ...to someone who has a similar lack of experience.  Have you looked
> at TADS either?  Really, that's what we're talking about.

I think you've brought up texture mapping several times.  If TADS is what
we're talking about, then why have you gone off the subject so many times.

> the claims I'd made.  Unfortunately it seems to have done neither.  Too
> bad, too; I thought it would make for a good discussion.

That's one thing the nets do.  Get off the subject into flame wars...

>>I hope we can exchange ideas and have less flaming, although sometimes
>>we just get into one of those flame war moods, and its so fun to flame!
> 
> Flaming is overtly attacking someone.  That's different from asking
> them to support their claims.  Really, if I told you that I'd written a
> game that uses real-time ray-tracing, wouldn't you demand to see the
> code before you believed me?  Computer programming isn't magic!

Who'd want to see the code?  I'd want to see the executable.

Truce?

Josh