michthro
Level: Smitemaestro
Rank Points: 679
Registered: 05-01-2005
IP: Logged
|
unlimited undo (+1)
Yes, I know the issue has been raised before, but not for a long time. I also know what the arguments against it are, and that nothing is likely to come of this, but I'd still like to state my case and suggest a possible compromise.
I think your views on this depend heavily on how you play DROD. There seem to be three ways:
1) You're only interested in completing rooms, without any regard for how many moves you use.
2) You go for reasonable efficiency, but not too seriously. You'll save a move here and there, move diagonally, go to the nearest exit etc., but you're not going to replay a room umpteen times for the sake of efficiency.
3) You're interested not only in solving rooms, but also in minimising the number of moves you use.
If you fall into one of the first categories, you probably are against it. Otherwise, you almost certainly are all for it, and I hope you will support me on this. I think most players who are against it perhaps don't realise just how high the standards set by players like StuartK, Kevin, Bibelot, and many others, are. And then there's Rabscuttle... When going for #1 scores, it's not just about saving the odd move, it's about optimising. The idea is to analyse the room and try to find the shortest possible solution. With long rooms players seldom go for absolute efficiency, but the standards are still high. With shorter rooms, if you leave a move in it, your high score won't last. By the way, this is not just about competing, it's also very interesting to optimise solutions. Trivial rooms become interesting, often with unexpected, interesting solutions. The simplest room can become a big challenge. The thing is, doing this sort of thing is much like analysing a chess position on a board. Doing so while only allowing yourself to undo one move, or otherwise going all the way back, would be a nightmare. It's the same with analysing DROD puzzles. Optimising involves a lot of trial-and-error, trying different approaches, replaying the same part over and over. It becomes extremely tedious, frustrating, and annoying. Not having unlimited undo simply wastes a lot of time. It detracts from the game. Those who like to go for efficiency will know the feeling.
Now for the other side of the coin:
People have said that unlimited undo makes rooms trivial. I don't see how unlimited undo tells me that the idea is to move goblin 1 to position 2, use it to shorten snake 3, but not kill it, then get it to 4 etc. Some rooms may become easier, and it may become too easy to find an optimal solution. But there are already many such rooms (mostly monsterless entrances), and anyway, the number of such rooms is far outweighed by the number of rooms that would still be far from trivial, and for which optimal solutions would not be easier to find, only quicker.
If you feel that appropriate checkpoint placement will do the trick, you don't understand what I mean by optimising. Try beating a couple of #1 scores, and you'll soon see what I mean. (And I'm sure you will beat them, but you'll see why unlimited undo would save a lot of time.)
Another argument is that players will get lazy, and start solving rooms by trial-and-error. Well, you don't have to use it. So there's the concern about newcomers getting the wrong idea, doing it by trial-and-error because they're not forced to think. Very valid point, so I suggest the following:
Let unlimited undo only become available, as an option, once you've completed KDD or JtRH. That way
1) newcomers aren't affected.
2) players not interested in optimising don't have to use it if they feel it spoils the fun for them.
3) players interested in optimising, believe me, will want to use it, and have more fun.
|