Author: John Merlino
Date: 11:59:43 11/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 09, 2000 at 08:30:45, Peter Skinner wrote: >I taught Kasparov, and Kramnik all they know, and I only used 4% of my chess >knowledge. In fact the top 10 players in the World attended my chess school. > >Sounds almost as stupid as you post, doesn't it? > >Why would someone under 2300 not want it? It really is a fine program. > >I see the Chessmaster series differently than I see the rest of the chess >programs that are commercially available. I see them as more of a game, not a >chess program. It has many more options to play with, and sure, it does have a >strong chess engine in it, but the interface reminds me of some sort of gaming >zone. > >I have a feeling if the ChessMaster team were to concentrate less on the >interface, and special little comments, graphics, and so on, CM would possibly >be a better "chess program". > >You also must remember that a toy company owns them, not a chess company. The development team's efforts for CM8000 were very much devoted to the kinds of chess players that are found on this board. WinBoard support, hash table settings that can be changed for each personality, swiss tournaments, WinNT and Win2K compatibility, new King engine, etc. Of course, much of their efforts were also devoted to things that the other 98% of the purchasers of Chessmaster would be interested in: updating the classroom content, 16-bit graphics, more customizable interface, etc. How do you define "chess program"? Or is it just that the CM interface gives you more than you need or want? jm
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.