*Another* System?
- Thread starter Jeffr0
- Start date
I started out on a R. Shack Color Computer (Coco) another of the 8 bit machines. Paid $600 for a whole 16k of ram and that did not include a floppy - just a cassette drive. Paid another $150 to get it upgraded to 32k ram. They used 1/2 good 64k ram chips and all chips in a given box were the either right half or left half good, so I paid Frank Hogg Labs $60+ more full 64k chips and installed their hardware mod to get a full 64k. Only then did I find out that I could only program for using the 2nd 32k if I was using machine language. Floppy drives (5 1/4 inch disks) added another $150 each. If you knew the right person you could get a whole 5 meg hard drive for about $500 more. The Coco 3 maxed out at 128k from RS, but aftermarket boards could take them up to a whole 512k (.5 meg) of ram. Had 1 of those C64's too. Then I went to the last of the compact, all-in-one Mac's(I think it was called called the Clasic). Then the LC line of Mac's and back into the wacky world of windows boxes. One day I hope to be able to buy a cutting edge machine again. I usually am 2 to 3 generations back due to lack of funds for the "Good Stuff".
The point is that the RS that hooked up to your TV for a display had more computing power than the first Norad mainframe. What it did not have was the ability to access as much data at one time.
Then some where between the main frames and the desk tops were the minis and the micros. CT computers were definatly main frames. The Coco and C64 and Texas Instrument boxes came out just about the same time as CT. Look at where Traveller is today. The military now actually has laser weapons that work reasonably well even if they aren't to the level of CT laser weapons. How many other technologies have surpassed what Marc and his Cronies from back then expected and how many haven't come near as far as they surmised?
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Well, if they found something they are able to track it that way.
Initial detection is the problem.
Hmm, and maybe a couple of scientists are just telling bullshit regarding their research successes......
Initial detection is the problem.
Hmm, and maybe a couple of scientists are just telling bullshit regarding their research successes......
http://atari-computermuseum.de/ states the 1976 release of the Atari 2600 and the apple I.
(the atari 400 and 800 are 1979)
According to: http://www.gondolin.org.uk/hchof
the vic20 is 1981; the PET machines are older by a couple years, but are large bulky beasts.
The Sinclairs start in 1980.
The TI/99 is 1982 (and 16 bit!)
http://www.maxmon.com/history.htm
says the apple I was released in 1976.
The Apple II was released in 1977, as was the PET (by commodore)
http://www.tim-mann.org/trs80faq.html
TRS80 Mod1 1977
http://www.nickm.launch.net.au/ProjectArchive/index.html
The CoCo (RadioShack Color Computer) is 1983 or 1984.
To be brutally honest, the computers available in the early-to-mid 70's were large, hard to use, and not terribly powerful, even given the bit-depth and memory limits.
The Personal computing machines had few applications (the only one MWM said he'd seen was a switch-programmed one), and the terminals and workstations of the day were (given access space) 0.5Td or so.
The small machines referenced above all post date or parallel the development of the traveller game. The Atari 2600 predates the development cycle, as does the apple I, and the atari was at least beyond lack of notice; it was not, however, advertised for it's computing power.
Most of the sci-fi of the time likewise posited huge computers, or at least huge and impersonal interface panels. For example, in Star Wars, it is apparent that the interface for the computer is some chunk of the huge array of switches.
Likewise, while Star Trek was not active on TV, the ST Tech Manual showed us a central computer array of at least some 20 Td... and the 1977 ST:TMP (Officialy "The Motion Picture", unofficially the Motion-less picture) shows us a huge machine (1000km+) to have the intelligence of a sophont... (I wonder, did V'Ger encounter the Borg?)
Buck Rogers (TV series), a couple years later, shows a belief in the rapid shrinking of computers; Dr. THeophilus being about a liter for a superhuman intellect.
Had Star Wars (which triggered Traveller, according to MWM's article in Dragon), or Traveller, been a couple years later, the view of computers would probably have been MUCH different. But Neither Marc nor lored, by their own admissions, were computechnophiles before traveller began.
and CT, BTW, is 1977. As is Mayday.
(the atari 400 and 800 are 1979)
According to: http://www.gondolin.org.uk/hchof
the vic20 is 1981; the PET machines are older by a couple years, but are large bulky beasts.
The Sinclairs start in 1980.
The TI/99 is 1982 (and 16 bit!)
http://www.maxmon.com/history.htm
says the apple I was released in 1976.
The Apple II was released in 1977, as was the PET (by commodore)
http://www.tim-mann.org/trs80faq.html
TRS80 Mod1 1977
http://www.nickm.launch.net.au/ProjectArchive/index.html
The CoCo (RadioShack Color Computer) is 1983 or 1984.
To be brutally honest, the computers available in the early-to-mid 70's were large, hard to use, and not terribly powerful, even given the bit-depth and memory limits.
The Personal computing machines had few applications (the only one MWM said he'd seen was a switch-programmed one), and the terminals and workstations of the day were (given access space) 0.5Td or so.
The small machines referenced above all post date or parallel the development of the traveller game. The Atari 2600 predates the development cycle, as does the apple I, and the atari was at least beyond lack of notice; it was not, however, advertised for it's computing power.
Most of the sci-fi of the time likewise posited huge computers, or at least huge and impersonal interface panels. For example, in Star Wars, it is apparent that the interface for the computer is some chunk of the huge array of switches.
Likewise, while Star Trek was not active on TV, the ST Tech Manual showed us a central computer array of at least some 20 Td... and the 1977 ST:TMP (Officialy "The Motion Picture", unofficially the Motion-less picture) shows us a huge machine (1000km+) to have the intelligence of a sophont... (I wonder, did V'Ger encounter the Borg?)
Buck Rogers (TV series), a couple years later, shows a belief in the rapid shrinking of computers; Dr. THeophilus being about a liter for a superhuman intellect.
Had Star Wars (which triggered Traveller, according to MWM's article in Dragon), or Traveller, been a couple years later, the view of computers would probably have been MUCH different. But Neither Marc nor lored, by their own admissions, were computechnophiles before traveller began.
and CT, BTW, is 1977. As is Mayday.
JustinThyme
SOC-10
Aramis, find that when you post, it stretches across the boards. So I'm running across the Forum Topics. Not brown nosing, just like to read your posts as you seem well informed. Your links were interesting, and I'm pursuing web sites with visuals, hoping to see some memorandum. If I recall, the Apple 1 was the size of a shoebox, and I used a cassette tape recorder if I wanted to store data. Aside from that, didn't Traveller predate Star Wars? My memory says so. Could be mistaken. With regards to computer use/design in Traveller, I always took it at face value. If the thing took ten tons and ran on steam, then so be it. That was half the fun. It did lend a flavour of Victorian Science Fiction, which was the premise stated of communication. Space 1889, anyone?
Star Wars was early 1977 (it was summerish). MWM's article in Dragon cites SW as a major impetus in CT, which was apparently Late 1977. Not the sole impetus, but a major one.
So it may have been what kicked it out the door....
and thanks for the complements.
I just got a wild hair about Andy's erroneous assertions that the personal computer was common when MWM wrote CT. When I decide to refute, I try to present overwhelming evidence, from as reliable sources as I can find.
In general, I take a very different view of canon than, say, almost all the GT authors. A lot of the nitpicks I find absurd. (Heck, a lot of people come across on here as absurd, and all to oft I am one of them.)
Heck, lets remember, until 1974, there were NO personal computers readily available at all, and Roleplaying was a therapeutic technique, except for a small group of people in and around wisconsin.
Then came both PC's (switch programmed beasties tho' they be), and D&D...
So it may have been what kicked it out the door....
and thanks for the complements.
I just got a wild hair about Andy's erroneous assertions that the personal computer was common when MWM wrote CT. When I decide to refute, I try to present overwhelming evidence, from as reliable sources as I can find.
In general, I take a very different view of canon than, say, almost all the GT authors. A lot of the nitpicks I find absurd. (Heck, a lot of people come across on here as absurd, and all to oft I am one of them.)
Heck, lets remember, until 1974, there were NO personal computers readily available at all, and Roleplaying was a therapeutic technique, except for a small group of people in and around wisconsin.
Then came both PC's (switch programmed beasties tho' they be), and D&D...
When I got my hands on my first box of LBBs, it was sitting on the bookshelf of our Chem/Physics lab at school. That was...'78, '79.
Sitting next to it, in all its glory, was my first exposure to computers: an IMSAI 8080, 16K of RAM, front panel switches, lighten-blinken LEDs, an open chassis(!!!) 9" B&W monitor. A big note "DO NOT TURN OFF" was taped to it, because you had to key in a 60 byte hex cassette loader to bootstrap BASIC from tape.
That computer was built as part of a school project the year before ('78). In mid '79, the school recieved a donation of 4 PET computers. Our science teacher was GIDDY. On His Knees talking to the donor at dinner when he found out giddy. He was SO excited. Those were amazing machines. $799 as I recall, 8K, built in monitor, built in cassette (the most reliable cassette system I've ever used), chiclet keyboard. I spent an large number of waking hours working on those machines. I would BREAK INTO THE LAB to work on those machines (i.e., leave the window open, jimmy the doors, etc.). Motivated student...
So, that gives some hint to what the time line was like from some old dog that was there
.
As far as computer power, systems like the CIWS that was mentioned use ANCIENT CDC microprocessors (CDC makes microprocessors??) ca. mid 70's. The Stinger POST missile system (POST being the more advanced seeker head) had a computer who code is in 2K of ROM. The sensors do the real work. Also, the Stinger is clever in that it only has 2 fins, rather than 4, and the missile spins to give it the ability to use those 2 fins in each axis. Pretty slick for 2K of code...
Sitting next to it, in all its glory, was my first exposure to computers: an IMSAI 8080, 16K of RAM, front panel switches, lighten-blinken LEDs, an open chassis(!!!) 9" B&W monitor. A big note "DO NOT TURN OFF" was taped to it, because you had to key in a 60 byte hex cassette loader to bootstrap BASIC from tape.
That computer was built as part of a school project the year before ('78). In mid '79, the school recieved a donation of 4 PET computers. Our science teacher was GIDDY. On His Knees talking to the donor at dinner when he found out giddy. He was SO excited. Those were amazing machines. $799 as I recall, 8K, built in monitor, built in cassette (the most reliable cassette system I've ever used), chiclet keyboard. I spent an large number of waking hours working on those machines. I would BREAK INTO THE LAB to work on those machines (i.e., leave the window open, jimmy the doors, etc.). Motivated student...
So, that gives some hint to what the time line was like from some old dog that was there
.As far as computer power, systems like the CIWS that was mentioned use ANCIENT CDC microprocessors (CDC makes microprocessors??) ca. mid 70's. The Stinger POST missile system (POST being the more advanced seeker head) had a computer who code is in 2K of ROM. The sensors do the real work. Also, the Stinger is clever in that it only has 2 fins, rather than 4, and the missile spins to give it the ability to use those 2 fins in each axis. Pretty slick for 2K of code...
I've got you beat, Whartung, on the CS side...
My first exposure to computers was in 1975... we had an apple II in the music room, and in the library. the old 48K machines, with no lowercase letters, connected to TV's. They were limited use machines, tape drives and all. 1st grade, at a school in a wealthy part of town. What's more, very few schools got them; by 1977, most scools in the district had three computers, 2 apple II's, and an IBM workstation (4KL) for handling scantrons. It couldn't process attendence daily; it was faster for the secretaries to type it in! (They still do, on the elementary level, in the same district. I now Sub-Teach in that district.) At the time, however, Anchorage had massive capital inflows from the Oil Boom of the mid 1970's. The school district got massive captial funding, and had a very techno-savvy, forward looking board... even by high-school, there was a mac lab, an apple II lab, and an IBM lab at my high school. The Macs were limited access (there were only 3), and the IBM lab was restricted to those with permission, and was the same lab as the macs. The Library had three open use Apple IIe's, and the computer lab had half a dozen apple IIe's.... in 1987. ASD has always been ahead of the curve, bleeding edge, and painfully so.
Now, the money is gone, and the last of the Apple II labs was killed just two years ago. (They are still used by SpEd and music for certain applications, by certain individual teachers. SpEd has a program for scoring that only runs on an Apple II; they use the test a lot.)
My first exposure to the LBB's was almost a decade later.
I discovered traveller in fall 1983... at lunch, in the social studies center... Immediate thoughts included "Wow, nothing but d6's", and "How Cool!", followed by some great stories. It was over two months before I discovered that there were PUBLISHED rules, and not just Rick's hand-written notes.
Really, I think T5 is too much like T4 to stand much of a chance; launching now is not likely to be good... Much as I would love a new and improved core ruleset, i don't think T5 is new nor improved.
My first exposure to computers was in 1975... we had an apple II in the music room, and in the library. the old 48K machines, with no lowercase letters, connected to TV's. They were limited use machines, tape drives and all. 1st grade, at a school in a wealthy part of town. What's more, very few schools got them; by 1977, most scools in the district had three computers, 2 apple II's, and an IBM workstation (4KL) for handling scantrons. It couldn't process attendence daily; it was faster for the secretaries to type it in! (They still do, on the elementary level, in the same district. I now Sub-Teach in that district.) At the time, however, Anchorage had massive capital inflows from the Oil Boom of the mid 1970's. The school district got massive captial funding, and had a very techno-savvy, forward looking board... even by high-school, there was a mac lab, an apple II lab, and an IBM lab at my high school. The Macs were limited access (there were only 3), and the IBM lab was restricted to those with permission, and was the same lab as the macs. The Library had three open use Apple IIe's, and the computer lab had half a dozen apple IIe's.... in 1987. ASD has always been ahead of the curve, bleeding edge, and painfully so.
Now, the money is gone, and the last of the Apple II labs was killed just two years ago. (They are still used by SpEd and music for certain applications, by certain individual teachers. SpEd has a program for scoring that only runs on an Apple II; they use the test a lot.)
My first exposure to the LBB's was almost a decade later.
I discovered traveller in fall 1983... at lunch, in the social studies center... Immediate thoughts included "Wow, nothing but d6's", and "How Cool!", followed by some great stories. It was over two months before I discovered that there were PUBLISHED rules, and not just Rick's hand-written notes.
Really, I think T5 is too much like T4 to stand much of a chance; launching now is not likely to be good... Much as I would love a new and improved core ruleset, i don't think T5 is new nor improved.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
Worse. I'm still affraid they plan to do the lose-leaf binder thingie (already proven a failure for the 1.0 release of 2nd Edition AD&D's Monster Manual).
Packaging is radically important in the modern gaming sales world.
Packaging is radically important in the modern gaming sales world.
rogermccarthy
SOC-12
Very strongly seconded on loose leaf binders.
I actually do have direct experience in marketing and design and loose leaf binders are generally considered a very bad idea for any sort of literature.
a) they are invariably more expensive to produce and design
b) they are both bulkier and more fragile than normal flat format books and this may result in a posted package not fitting through standard letterboxes (assuming you live in a country where most people have letterboxes in their front doors).
c) they will take up more space in a typical FLGS display and normal bookshops (at least in the UK some of these still sell RPGs) will probably refuse outright to stock them.
Whether you like it or not almost all RPG's are now sold in a standard large book format - and anyone who attempts to buck this trend, generally regrets it and either go bust or give up and follow the herd.
To give three recent examples:
Greg Stafford/Issaries Inc (an organisation with several similarities to FFE) originally issued their Hero Wars game for Glorantha in a old-fashioned box containing rulebooks in a 256- page trade paperback format and followed it up with several supplements in trade paperback format. Within a couple of years they switched back to normal large RPG size for later supplements and the 2nd edition.
SJG planned a series of Traveller Planet guides and Hero books in small booklet format. Although excellent products, most gamers seem to have decided they were overpriced for what was after all just a single planetary or character class write-up and the series did not sell well and was quietly dropped.
Similarly while I love the little BITS books, they are a pain to file on normal bookshelves and easily lost (I haven't been able to find my copy of ACQ for months...) and even they have switched to normal large RPG format for the Power Projection and Traveller Bibliography books.
Loose leaf binders (and even though I regret to say it resurrected LBBs) are a very, very bad idea commercially and I fervently hope Marc drops it before it goes too far.
I actually do have direct experience in marketing and design and loose leaf binders are generally considered a very bad idea for any sort of literature.
a) they are invariably more expensive to produce and design
b) they are both bulkier and more fragile than normal flat format books and this may result in a posted package not fitting through standard letterboxes (assuming you live in a country where most people have letterboxes in their front doors).
c) they will take up more space in a typical FLGS display and normal bookshops (at least in the UK some of these still sell RPGs) will probably refuse outright to stock them.
Whether you like it or not almost all RPG's are now sold in a standard large book format - and anyone who attempts to buck this trend, generally regrets it and either go bust or give up and follow the herd.
To give three recent examples:
Greg Stafford/Issaries Inc (an organisation with several similarities to FFE) originally issued their Hero Wars game for Glorantha in a old-fashioned box containing rulebooks in a 256- page trade paperback format and followed it up with several supplements in trade paperback format. Within a couple of years they switched back to normal large RPG size for later supplements and the 2nd edition.
SJG planned a series of Traveller Planet guides and Hero books in small booklet format. Although excellent products, most gamers seem to have decided they were overpriced for what was after all just a single planetary or character class write-up and the series did not sell well and was quietly dropped.
Similarly while I love the little BITS books, they are a pain to file on normal bookshelves and easily lost (I haven't been able to find my copy of ACQ for months...) and even they have switched to normal large RPG format for the Power Projection and Traveller Bibliography books.
Loose leaf binders (and even though I regret to say it resurrected LBBs) are a very, very bad idea commercially and I fervently hope Marc drops it before it goes too far.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
The book that has seen the most use from me for the last year or so has been the FFE Books 0-8 reprint.
And my all time favourite format was the Traveller Starter Set, with its separate book of charts and tables. I don't know how fond of it I would have been if I didn't already know the rules, but that charts and tables book just about doubles as a super-sized referee's screen.
I wonder what other people feel about those two formats?
And my all time favourite format was the Traveller Starter Set, with its separate book of charts and tables. I don't know how fond of it I would have been if I didn't already know the rules, but that charts and tables book just about doubles as a super-sized referee's screen.
I wonder what other people feel about those two formats?
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I don't mind the reprint format, primarily because it was the best way to package them. A reprint in the normal format wouldn't have worked.
Necessity governed here, but then, we already know that the reprints didn't sell enough copies fast enough to justify a second print run. (Yes, I know, the age of the subject matter had something to do with it, but the format probably contributed its own little corner.)
I still have a big knot of nostalgia in my heart for the LBBs, but that won't work in today's gaming world, and FFE will find out the hard way that the same is true for binders if it tries that two years from now.
Oh, I'll still buy it, have no doubt. But also, remember, that I'm in the same group of limited fans who bought the CT reprints, as well. That isn't the target demographic for T5. T5 needs to target the entire gaming population.
I'll continue beating on a dead horse here.
My views on what T5 will need in order to succeed in the modern gaming market.
</font>
EDIT--03/30/2005--2239 MST
I added parenthetical additions to several bullet points, and added a bullet point to the beginning to pull the context of my comments and beliefs together.
Necessity governed here, but then, we already know that the reprints didn't sell enough copies fast enough to justify a second print run. (Yes, I know, the age of the subject matter had something to do with it, but the format probably contributed its own little corner.)
I still have a big knot of nostalgia in my heart for the LBBs, but that won't work in today's gaming world, and FFE will find out the hard way that the same is true for binders if it tries that two years from now.
Oh, I'll still buy it, have no doubt. But also, remember, that I'm in the same group of limited fans who bought the CT reprints, as well. That isn't the target demographic for T5. T5 needs to target the entire gaming population.
I'll continue beating on a dead horse here.
My views on what T5 will need in order to succeed in the modern gaming market.
</font>
- Wholeness: The following is a sum of the components, not to be taken separately. And while the various activities may be done separately, not doing them all introduces, I believe, the possibility of encountering difficulties in achieving a major release success for T5.</font>
- Advertising: T5 is off to small but intelligent start here, with their early press release and far-in-advance advertising product release. They will need to continue by running ads in major magazines, and getting ads spots in major Convention booklets (like Origins and the various GenCons). The ads will be every four to six months now, every other month in 2006, and every month in 2007. Offering other pre-release products as things progress will also be excellent.</font>
- Evangelism: Marc will have to hit the road and appear at every major Con, every year until release, with the latest beta of T5 in-hand with pre-generated characters and adventures ready to go, so that people can join in. He will need to appear in a "T5 Jumping In" panel at every single Con, and be prepared with a full hour of T5 discussion (if questions and other things break in, fine, but he'll need a whole hour, just in case); and that hour of discussion had better be able to wow hardened gamers, and have a good answer to all the old classic criticisms of Traveller (regardless of whether those criticisms were ever valid) in case those criticisms are brought up. If Marc can get Loren to go with him, so much the better. Extra personnel to help run extra games would be a must, IMO. Is this going to be expensive? Yes. Is it absolutely necessary to generate fan-fever and dispel the old ghosts? Yes.</font>
- Fan Involvement: By putting up and using a company game developer's blog. By having regular progress reports on the game posted online (as more formal reports than blog posts). By actually massively playtesting the game (as in, distributing beta copies to game groups far and wide who will run games and send their input back in). By actually listening to fan input about the playtest (Blizzard North has a terrible reputation for ignoring everything its game beta playtesters say). Including the names of the main playtesters, if not in the actual book, then online on an official webpage and in a .pdf downloadable file that clearly lists itself as an extra chapter of the main rulebook that could not be included due to space. But, even more than the above, having FFE developers actively involve fans in the game via online board conversations, etc. The more involved the core online fans are, the more they will produce peripheral evangelism on behalf of FFE.</font>
- Packaging: The first rules-release must be in standard hardback format, no question. It must have a semi-flat, semi-glossy cover and the cover artwork had best blow everyone who sees it out of their socks and back through any walls behind them (not having this will be a major blow to the release). The now-standard modern spine-construction is a must. The pages must be crisp and clean, and a personal must for me, the book must have that deep paper smell of a new game book. (Note: I have since stated that "perfect-bound" publication would be acceptable. Primarily because it would reduce the price considerably. However, I still think that perfect-bound books, either Palladium style or Gateway to Destiny style, do not wear as well or as long as hardback books.)</font>
- Layout: The text must be clear and easy to read, with good contrast from the background. I should not get stabbing pains behind my eyes or headaches from trying to read the text. Putting dark grey text on black backgrounds is a no-no (White Wolf could take a lesson or two from this). Text must wrap artwork in intelligent ways (Shadowrun had a big problem with odd geometric shapes on the pages making text wrap in odd ways that caused lines to appear that were only one word wide; let's avoid this). The artwork that appears next to something had best be related to the text (this is pretty tough in actual practice, but as Joe Fugate let us know, it can be done; and since the core rulebook will be so important, it might as well be done for the most important book). Font-types, acceptable leading and margin under 1 inch (preferably under 3/4 inch). Of course, interior artwork must impress us as well. It'll be no good to have one of the best cover artworks in gaming history only to have low quality artwork in the interior. (There has been substantial comment about the cover art comments following my original version of this post: I stand by my statement that a part of major success will require a top-flight cover. I personally will settle for a lot less, and so will the hardcore fandom of Traveller. A demographic exists that doesn't even care what the cover art is. But those aren't big enough demographics for a major success.)</font>
- Organization: The sections must be organized logically, and contain subject matter that belongs within them (don't laugh, early White Wolf and 1st Ed. Shadowrun had severe problems with this). There must be a useful TOC and a useful index (it is possible to include useless versions of these tools).</font>
- Story: The story of the OTU must be presented in a manner which will invite in new players. Old persnickety inconsistencies must be eliminated, one way or another.</font>
- Rules: The rules must be integrated, coherent, and understandable easily, to both new and old gamer alike. This does not mean that we must avoid having a lot of rules, as d20 shows us. The standard sections, Milieu Intro, Character Generation, Combat, Interaction (personal and world), GM Support, Starting Adventures. It's my personal opinion that a ready-made subsector, with thumbnails for all worlds be included. The worlds and starsystems will be created in the new all-modern UWP generation rules that will be the hallmark of T5. A collection of starship designs will be included. (In my original post, I forgot to mention that the rules must be easy to use, and must be as close to errata-free as humanly possible; given many previous Traveller editions problems with errata, I think this is especially important.)</font>
- Continuing Publication: The T5 product line had better be ready to release at least one major sourcebook within two months of T5's release, and probably at least three to five more sourcebooks and adventures within the next six to twelve months. Anything less will not meet the expectations those who attempt to buy into T5. Personally, I think that there should be four products more or less ready to go on first release day. Month One: Core rules release; Month Two: OTU Sourcebook; Month Three: Stellar Surveys (the new world/starsystem generation); Month Four: Armada (Navy/Tech Architecture). Followed on by local regional or sector sourcebooks, alien races books, etc. The whole of Charted Space will contain redone UWPs that will flatten out the insanity of the old poorly created data (the nature and reasons for this have been discussed massively elsewhere).</font>
- Product Support: An online board (maybe a part of an existing board) where actual FFE employees answer questions about the game in a timely manner (designate someone as the official rules arbiter, as has been done by other companies), as in daily. WotC has a made it a habit to take sections cut from a product and putting them online for download (this is an excellent idea).</font>
- Continuity Break: A clear and cognizant explanation of all continuity error solutions and rules decisions, with all whys and wherefores, and links to the online posts for and against and what the eventual decisions were. This will help all existing fans understand what happened to produce the T5 setting. It will contain the complete summary of the developer's blog and the online monthly formal reports on the game's progress.</font>
- Developmental Archive: All the online work put into the game needs to be carefully archived and preserved in a format that will continue to be accessible online, both for historical purposes, fan interest, and so that when the inevitable T6 comes along, it will be there for all to ponder and consider.</font>
EDIT--03/30/2005--2239 MST
I added parenthetical additions to several bullet points, and added a bullet point to the beginning to pull the context of my comments and beliefs together.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Chris, please post this over at the T5 web site as well as here, if not, give me permision and I'll copy it across for you.
That is one of the clearest visions for what T5 could/should be I've seen (no offence meant to anyone - just in case ).
Mike.
That is one of the clearest visions for what T5 could/should be I've seen (no offence meant to anyone - just in case
).Mike.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I'm registered over on the T5 forum, so I'll copy it over.Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Chris, please post this over at the T5 web site as well as here, if not, give me permision and I'll copy it across for you.
That is one of the clearest visions for what T5 could/should be I've seen (no offence meant to anyone - just in case
Mike.
See: T5: A Vision for Success.
Originally posted by Aramis:
I've got you beat, Whartung, on the CS side...
I may have you both beat.
1972, built a mechanical computer from a kit.
1974, learned Fortran on an IBM360
1975, Learned to program a HP45 "calculator"
1978, Ran BMDP statistics packages on a DEC
1978 Played Traveller, bought LBB immediately
1979, Learned BASIC on an Apple II
1980, Bought a Commodore 64
1981 Revised computer rules IMTU to essentially what I posted above.
Really, I think T5 is too much like T4 to stand much of a chance; launching now is not likely to be good... Much as I would love a new and improved core ruleset, i don't think T5 is new nor improved.
I regretfully concur. I think the problems with TNE and T4 was they may have been new, but not noticably improved.
I've got you beat, Whartung, on the CS side...
I may have you both beat.
1972, built a mechanical computer from a kit.
1974, learned Fortran on an IBM360
1975, Learned to program a HP45 "calculator"
1978, Ran BMDP statistics packages on a DEC
1978 Played Traveller, bought LBB immediately
1979, Learned BASIC on an Apple II
1980, Bought a Commodore 64
1981 Revised computer rules IMTU to essentially what I posted above.
Really, I think T5 is too much like T4 to stand much of a chance; launching now is not likely to be good... Much as I would love a new and improved core ruleset, i don't think T5 is new nor improved.
I regretfully concur. I think the problems with TNE and T4 was they may have been new, but not noticably improved.
It's a nice theory. I don't forsee it working that way. <shrug>
For my money, I'm not interested in paying extra for a large hardcover book that has fancy art. I long ago filled my shelves with piles of 'nice looking' games. Now, I'm just as happy with the classic spartan look if the *material* inside is well presented (I agree with the comments on index, TOC, and consistency).
The truth is, most interior or even exterior art eventually ends up on a shelf. What ends up getting used are a refs screen, some dice, and adventures. And character sheets. And maybe a QR chart for skills, etc. Otherwise, not much, except maybe once and a while if a character gains new skills or hte like.
Most of the time in CT or MT, once we've created characters, I rarely need to go back to the books. I don't see T5 being any different.
I've bought just about every classic, megatraveller, and TNE product. Some in several formats (on paper and later in PDF). Some I own several copies of. I'll probably buy T5, as I did T4, even though I didn't like T4 enough to play it and have the same fear about T5.
I see the big issue as being clearly presented, well written, modern rules that are easily playable with minimal reference to the books.
Fancy cover art, fancy interior art, etc. do play some role, but I believe they are secondary. A great game has to be the core of T5, or everything else is a waste of fancy wrapping paper on a dead fish.
For my money, I'm not interested in paying extra for a large hardcover book that has fancy art. I long ago filled my shelves with piles of 'nice looking' games. Now, I'm just as happy with the classic spartan look if the *material* inside is well presented (I agree with the comments on index, TOC, and consistency).
The truth is, most interior or even exterior art eventually ends up on a shelf. What ends up getting used are a refs screen, some dice, and adventures. And character sheets. And maybe a QR chart for skills, etc. Otherwise, not much, except maybe once and a while if a character gains new skills or hte like.
Most of the time in CT or MT, once we've created characters, I rarely need to go back to the books. I don't see T5 being any different.
I've bought just about every classic, megatraveller, and TNE product. Some in several formats (on paper and later in PDF). Some I own several copies of. I'll probably buy T5, as I did T4, even though I didn't like T4 enough to play it and have the same fear about T5.
I see the big issue as being clearly presented, well written, modern rules that are easily playable with minimal reference to the books.
Fancy cover art, fancy interior art, etc. do play some role, but I believe they are secondary. A great game has to be the core of T5, or everything else is a waste of fancy wrapping paper on a dead fish.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
kaladorn,
What I'm willing to settle for, and what will succeed wildly in the marketplace, are two different things.
If T5 came out as LBBs, I'd buy it. I might buy it if it came out as papyrus scrolls. However, it would not be a big success in the gaming world at large in either of these formats. Binders would also flop. I think so-so artwork and non-standard packaging will flop as well.
In my earlier post, I was describing a recipe for big success, not listing my personal requirements (well, I did toss in one, the deep paper smell; which is like a new car smell to me, but less expensive).
Your comment about packaging being a waste if the rules are not satisfactory is absolutely correct. But if the rules are fantastic and nobody buys the game, it is also a waste.
What I'm willing to settle for, and what will succeed wildly in the marketplace, are two different things.
If T5 came out as LBBs, I'd buy it. I might buy it if it came out as papyrus scrolls. However, it would not be a big success in the gaming world at large in either of these formats. Binders would also flop. I think so-so artwork and non-standard packaging will flop as well.
In my earlier post, I was describing a recipe for big success, not listing my personal requirements (well, I did toss in one, the deep paper smell; which is like a new car smell to me, but less expensive).
Your comment about packaging being a waste if the rules are not satisfactory is absolutely correct. But if the rules are fantastic and nobody buys the game, it is also a waste.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I think that web based support could be the key to this.
A free lite rules pdf, intro adventure and a few charts and tables before the book is launched.
Then release some extra setting material, more adventures, and a full referee's kit all as cheap pdfs - with dead tree versions to follow of course.
Hmm, Traveller on papyrus. Where can I buy a set? ebay???
A free lite rules pdf, intro adventure and a few charts and tables before the book is launched.
Then release some extra setting material, more adventures, and a full referee's kit all as cheap pdfs - with dead tree versions to follow of course.
Hmm, Traveller on papyrus. Where can I buy a set? ebay???
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I guess it may only be me, but I think leading off T5's initial release as pdf and then having it's main support as pdf would be a major disaster. Oh, sales would be there, and money would be made.
But I'm talking about production for a *major* success (in gaming sales terms), and pdf releases will not be that success.
And I will not buy pdf releases of T5 (because I cannot sit there at my computer to read them).
Similar threads
