Author: John Merlino
Date: 14:15:06 10/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 01, 2001 at 16:25:13, Roy Eassa wrote:
>On September 30, 2001 at 21:13:44, John Merlino wrote:
>
>>On September 30, 2001 at 18:03:19, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>
>>>On September 30, 2001 at 09:09:45, John Robertson wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 30, 2001 at 06:59:54, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>... Chessmaster is significantly
>>>>weaker than various other chess software that is readily available...
>>>
>>>
>>>I strongly disagree with this. Very often, CM8000 is the *best* engine at
>>>finding complex mates, and its general play is approximately at the same level
>>>as that of other top programs.
>>>
>>>
>>>>... Also the interface is more oriented towards a children's game
>>>>than something designed for the serious chess player/analyst.
>>>
>>>
>>>This I mostly agree with. It's the second-biggest problem with this program
>>>(the biggest being that it requires the CD-ROM _every_ time).
>>>
>>>
>>>Hey John Merlino, do you hear this? The engine in CM8000 is world-class, but
>>>you guys crippled it in two key ways. Please fix these or come out with a
>>>different version for adults -- with fewer glitzy features but not requiring the
>>>CD-ROM each time!
>>
>>Regarding your two concerns:
>>
>>1) The "glitzy features" (or, to more accurately describe it, the "interface")
>>are what sell the product to most people. The look and feel of the program also
>>set it apart from other programs, which are mostly designed for serious chess
>>enthusiasts -- not beginners. How many people who know nothing about chess would
>>buy Fritz over Chessmaster?
>>Additionally, the current interface has grown almost entirely with the help and
>>requests of users (and some of them are on this board). The "room" metaphor, for
>>example, came from many users saying that CM6000's interface was too confusing,
>>in that there were very few visual cues to tell the user what was going on ("Am
>>I playing a Rated Game? Am I online? Am I taking a tutorial? What do I do
>>next?").
>>Besides, what would you consider a "glitzy feature"? What do you think is
>>something that NO "serious chess enthusiast" would want? Adding features is
>>always better than REMOVING features, because every feature is used by SOMEBODY.
>>
>>2) The decision to require the CD was entirely that of The Learning Company,
>>whether we wanted it or not. I have no idea what Ubi Soft's policy regarding
>>copy protection is at this time, but I do know that the majority of the new
>>programs are going out with some form of copy protection/CD requirement. So, for
>>the next version, it will once again not be the decision of the development team
>>as to whether the program requires the CD.
>>
>>So, in a nutshell, there will be no "hardcore" or "stripped down" version of
>>Chessmaster (at least not any time soon), although it HAS been discussed several
>>times over the years.
>>
>>Also, to say that the engine is "crippled" is a bit harsh, don't you think?
>>
>>jm
>
>
>I didn't mean that the engine is crippled, only that the overall use by the
>people who post here is way less than that of Fritz, Chess Tiger, etc., because
>of the unique GUI and/or the CD-ROM requirement. The engine itself is strong!
>
>Also, let me hasten to add that I purchased Chessmaster 2000 way back when, then
>2100, 3000, 4000, 5000, 5500, 6000, 7000, and 8000. I've been a pretty good
>customer over the years! I also have a couple Macintosh versions.
>
>I also didn't mean that features should be removed (necessarily), although I do
>have concerns over resource usage. But the best idea, one that I didn't explain
>well, was the idea of releasing a separate version as a module for
>Chessbase/Fritz, or perhaps as a Winboard engine that doesn't require the CD (or
>a new code number) each launch. Offer it as an additional element on the next
>version's CD, and/or sell it separately -- in which case you can charge what the
>market will bear and copy-protect the CD-ROM. Then The King will find itself
>involved in a lot of the computer chess tournaments that it's now left out of,
>and it will take its rightful place alongside the works of the other top-notch
>chess engine programmers. (By the way, I would also urge the programmers of
>Chess Genius and MChess Pro to come out with Fritz or Winboard module versions
>so they aren't forgotten with time either.)
I figured that was what you were implying, but I just wanted to make sure. As
previously mentioned, I will bring up this suggestion to the decision-makers.
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.