by Eric » Thu Aug 01, 2002 8:29 am
This thread brings to mind a Hugo query which I'll get to eventually...
I gotta admit I'm unlikely to ever write a proper IF game. Writing IF is just grossly time consuming even for someone who has some facility with a language, I gather. But for a nonprogrammer who's endlessly learning as he goes -- forget it. I am just finishing co-authoring a mystery novel. I reckon, even if I knew Hugo, it'd take me twice as long, at least, to write a game the size of FOD as to write novel, by myself. (Of course, how about, "The Mystery of the Stove"?) And, honestly, it'd be a pretty ridiculous misallocation of my time to screw around with a what would be a half-assed game cause I don't know what I'm doing rather than writing the decent book I can finally produce after plenty of practice and which has some chance of getting published.
All the same I like toying with If and writing down a lot of junk and seeing the computer do something with it. Whoa!!!
But though I have enjoyed some Hugo games I've never warmed up to the language. Not a easy as Alan which I actually have some facility at, let alone ADRIFT (which becomes quickly more mind bending than Alan actually if you want to do anything reasonable) or even as appealing, on the surface as TADS. For some reason, the way you write things in TADS struck me as friendlier than Inform and Hugo, does look more like Inform, or at least so it seemed after it was pointed out to me. (Minor maybe but that having to put // in lines of text in Hugo really made a bad impression when I was just looking at it in a shallow fashion)
But yeah, the problem is, the documention seems to rank opposite to my preferences, with Inform's being the best and the Hugo manual being, well, perfectly fine, but a manual. What little I've learned of other languages I've started with tutorials and then got more from the manuals.
Anyway, I am beginning to wonder what the future holds for Hugo. Is Kent planning big changes? Reason I ask is I learned Alan which Thomas Nilsson is now improving. For one thing he's added classes. Excellent but I'll have to do a fair amount of relearning, plus my older games won't be playable on the new interpreter -- the short game I've been working on, which I figured was too far along to change over to the new Alan, will be "obsolete" by the time I finish. ADRIFT went shareware, and between that and it being Windows only, it isn't much use from a R*IF viewpoint whatever its merits, plus the games I did are obsolete in effect. So I was learning TADS 2 till I stopped to write the aforementioned book. And in the months I've been off IF I've been reading more and more posts on RAIF about TADS 3 so if I ever learn TADS 2 or finish that introcomp thing that'll probably be "obsolete" on arrival. Sure, I know people will play TADS 2 games still, but it is just the idea. So I was wondering how stable Hugo looks right now?
Eric
This thread brings to mind a Hugo query which I'll get to eventually...
I gotta admit I'm unlikely to ever write a proper IF game. Writing IF is just grossly time consuming even for someone who has some facility with a language, I gather. But for a nonprogrammer who's endlessly learning as he goes -- forget it. I am just finishing co-authoring a mystery novel. I reckon, even if I knew Hugo, it'd take me twice as long, at least, to write a game the size of FOD as to write novel, by myself. (Of course, how about, "The Mystery of the Stove"?) And, honestly, it'd be a pretty ridiculous misallocation of my time to screw around with a what would be a half-assed game cause I don't know what I'm doing rather than writing the decent book I can finally produce after plenty of practice and which has some chance of getting published.
All the same I like toying with If and writing down a lot of junk and seeing the computer do something with it. Whoa!!!
But though I have enjoyed some Hugo games I've never warmed up to the language. Not a easy as Alan which I actually have some facility at, let alone ADRIFT (which becomes quickly more mind bending than Alan actually if you want to do anything reasonable) or even as appealing, on the surface as TADS. For some reason, the way you write things in TADS struck me as friendlier than Inform and Hugo, does look more like Inform, or at least so it seemed after it was pointed out to me. (Minor maybe but that having to put // in lines of text in Hugo really made a bad impression when I was just looking at it in a shallow fashion)
But yeah, the problem is, the documention seems to rank opposite to my preferences, with Inform's being the best and the Hugo manual being, well, perfectly fine, but a manual. What little I've learned of other languages I've started with tutorials and then got more from the manuals.
Anyway, I am beginning to wonder what the future holds for Hugo. Is Kent planning big changes? Reason I ask is I learned Alan which Thomas Nilsson is now improving. For one thing he's added classes. Excellent but I'll have to do a fair amount of relearning, plus my older games won't be playable on the new interpreter -- the short game I've been working on, which I figured was too far along to change over to the new Alan, will be "obsolete" by the time I finish. ADRIFT went shareware, and between that and it being Windows only, it isn't much use from a R*IF viewpoint whatever its merits, plus the games I did are obsolete in effect. So I was learning TADS 2 till I stopped to write the aforementioned book. And in the months I've been off IF I've been reading more and more posts on RAIF about TADS 3 so if I ever learn TADS 2 or finish that introcomp thing that'll probably be "obsolete" on arrival. Sure, I know people will play TADS 2 games still, but it is just the idea. So I was wondering how stable Hugo looks right now?
Eric