Actually, chess has been modified to spark interest when interest had been lacking on many occasions, but none have lasted very long, and the game's current rules have stayed pretty stable for many years. The only 2 major rule changes within the last several hundred years are that the pawn could move 2 squares on its first move as well as now being allowed to capture en passant, and that the queen can now move as far as possible along a diagonal, vertical or horizontal line, and can capture in the same way. It ain't pretty when the pretty leaves you with no place to go.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Vlasak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Gamers Discussion list" <gamers@audyssey.org> Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 5:14 PM Subject: [Audyssey] Thoughts about chess > Hi Charles, > If there was ever a game that is old and dusty, it is chess! > We could make it modern by changing the way the pieces move! > Have you ever seen a horse that moves straight and then turns 90 degrees? > How about having him jump two spaces, then jump two more and for the hell > of it jump another two in a straight line! > And how about the castles they should not be able to move at all, except > if > they fall over and crush what is next to them thus killing themselves. > And who ever saw a king that was so old and feeble he could only move one > square? > How about if the king could jump eight squares in any direction! > Wow that will knock the dust off this old game! > smiles, > Phil > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles Rivard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Gamers Discussion list" <gamers@audyssey.org> > Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 6:21 PM > Subject: Re: [Audyssey] Thoughts about Montezuma's Revenge. > > >> You're missing the point entirely, though. Here are some of your >> thoughts, >> with a response that will, hopefully, explain why it should be left as it >> originally was. These are my thoughts on yours: >> >> This is the 21st century and everyone wants something that was popular in >> the 70-80's to be kept the same. >> >> How about moving up and upgrading to the current and future? If people >> want >> games that are from the 70-80's, why not just buy a game from that era >> and >> play it? >> My response is that we, as blind people, who have not been able to play >> the >> original games, will now have a chance to do so. Because we have never >> played the game, it is, obviously, new to us. I emphasize new to us, >> because that is the key. >> >> How ridiculous is it to want a game that is old and dusty? Why not have a >> game that has a lot of replay value and one that can offer so much more >> fun >> and challenges and current with today's programming capabilities? why not >> make a game that is attractive to all old and young a like? >> My response: What makes you think that Montezuma's Revenge has no replay >> value? The game's age?? Have you played it all the way through? No, >> because it does not exist in a format that blind people can access. Here >> again, just because a game is old does not mean that it does not have >> replay >> value. Chess is over 2,000 years old, and it is still played all over >> the >> world by tons of people. The age of a game has no bearing on whether it >> has, or does not have, replay value. If a game is good, it will remain >> so. >> Time does tell the quality of a game. The good ones last forever. >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gamers mailing list .. Gamers@audyssey.org > To unsubscribe send E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can > visit > http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org to make > any subscription changes via the web. > _______________________________________________ Gamers mailing list .. Gamers@audyssey.org To unsubscribe send E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can visit http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org to make any subscription changes via the web.
