[tabacco]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

Excellent. Now I've got DosBox for my XP machine I must try firing up this classic again. (Last time I tried running it the music was all wonky) Talking about how the different time periods are used in puzzles without spoilers (excepting the minor one noted) was very impressive.

Do just have to mention one problem I had with the review. It's just a pet peeve of mine. (my emboldening)


Though common usage (bad common usage ) seems to have made this acceptable I've always understood unique to mean "being the only one" or "being without like or comparision" So either something is unique or it isn't. It can be almost unique, but it can't be "fairly one of a kind"

Have you tried ScummVM? For getting LucasArts games to run, it's a lot easier than DosBox, plus you get the graphics filters and stuff.

[AGA]

Plus almost all LEC games are guaranteed to work flawlessly, which they aren't with DOSBox.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by Jackal

It's common usage because in its strictest sense, the word is absolutely useless. Both everything and nothing are perfectly "unique". Every distinct thing is one of a kind, no matter how many similarities it shares with others, but nothing is "without like or comparison", as all things share something in common with others. So, creating a sliding scale of uniqueness is the only thing that gives the word any value. Makes a lot more sense to say "fairly unique" than to say "unique in sense A,B,C, but common in sense X,Y,Z."

It's false reasoning to say that the word is useless "in it's strictest sense" and therefore it's true meaning can be safely ignored. The strictest sense rarely applies in real life usage. It's perfectly possible to use the word unique correctly because you will normally be using it in context. To take an example from the review

Originally Posted by remixor

The ability to share most inventory items allows for unique methods of problem solving.

You can take actions in the past that affect the future.(and pass items from the future to the past). This creates puzzle solutions that are "without like or comparison" since no-one before (or since as far as I'm aware) has created puzzles that can be solved in this way. This is therefore unique AS A WAY OF SOLVING PUZZLES. This covers your "unique in sense A,B,C, but common in sense X,Y,Z." because they are still ways of solving puzzles (in common with other adventure games)

There are plenty of words to describe things that are rare but not unique. (rare for example) I just don't see why unique's meaning should be devalued by, in effect, ignoring it's nature as an absolute.

Still loved the review by the way Chris. Not having a personal dig here. It's just my own feelings about this particular word.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

It's false reasoning to say that the word is useless "in it's strictest sense" and therefore it's true meaning can be safely ignored.

I see you've tried to assert a "true meaning" in there. I never can figure out why people don't understand the legitimate (and necessary) flexibility of words. You can probably find far less rigid definitions of the word in any dictionary. Just for fun, I'll list one of Merriam-Webster's, with its corresponding examples.

Originally Posted by Merriam-Webster

3 : UNUSUAL <a very unique ball-point pen> <we were fairly unique, the sixty of us, in that there wasn't one good mixer in the bunch -- J. D. Salinger>

Now, unless you want to simply dismiss THAT meaning entirely (because it's #3, I guess), then I don't see why there's a problem.

You can take actions in the past that affect the future.(and pass items from the future to the past). This creates puzzle solutions that are "without like or comparison" since no-one before (or since as far as I'm aware) has created puzzles that can be solved in this way. This is therefore unique AS A WAY OF SOLVING PUZZLES. This covers your "unique in sense A,B,C, but common in sense X,Y,Z." because they are still ways of solving puzzles (in common with other adventure games)

Well, no, this is actually a good example against your argument. Sharing inventory items and time-related puzzle solving have both been done before - though maybe not in this particular combination. And this sort of partly yes/partly no overlap is what frequently happens in any comparison. So unless you want to qualify your statements to the nth degree, simply calling something "unique" as if it's something completely new is often misleading. I agree that using a Chron-o-John for the job is probably unique in your preferred meaning, though.

There are plenty of words to describe things that are rare but not unique. (rare for example) I just don't see why unique's meaning should be devalued by, in effect, ignoring it's nature as an absolute.

Sure, there are often words that serve similar functions. But one is not intrinsically better than another. Anyway, I understand you don't like it, but that's different from claiming it's somehow definitively wrong.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Jackal

It's common usage because in its strictest sense, the word is absolutely useless. Both everything and nothing are perfectly "unique". Every distinct thing is one of a kind, no matter how many similarities it shares with others, but nothing is "without like or comparison", as all things share something in common with others. So, creating a sliding scale of uniqueness is the only thing that gives the word any value. Makes a lot more sense to say "fairly unique" than to say "unique in sense A,B,C, but common in sense X,Y,Z."

Dunno, Jack, unique is a french word, and I can't think of any occasion when we would use a translation of "fairly unique". Unless the meaning has changed a lot between languages, that is.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by Jackal

I see you've tried to assert a "true meaning" in there. I never can figure out why people don't understand the legitimate (and necessary) flexibility of words. You can probably find far less rigid definitions of the word in any dictionary. Just for fun, I'll list one of Merriam-Webster's, with its corresponding examples.

Now, unless you want to simply dismiss THAT meaning entirely (because it's #3, I guess), then I don't see why there's a problem.

Oddly enough, when I referred to the "fairly unique" form becoming acceptable through common usage, it was because I'd found that very meaning on Merriam-Webster myself. Looking in older dictionaries that meaning doesn't appear but in up-to-date dictionaries it does because it's been used too often for dictionaries to ignore.

Well, no, this is actually a good example against your argument. Sharing inventory items and time-related puzzle solving have both been done before - though maybe not in this particular combination. And this sort of partly yes/partly no overlap is what frequently happens in any comparison. So unless you want to qualify your statements to the nth degree, simply calling something "unique" as if it's something completely new is often misleading. I agree that using a Chron-o-John for the job is probably unique in your preferred meaning, though.

When you say time-related puzzle solving do you mean puzzles that can only be solved at certain times or timed puzzles? If so, then that is completely different to DOTT where objects from the future can be sent to the past (and vice versa) I can't think of any other game where you can send objects back in time (and solve puzzles by doing so) If you do know of other games working in this way can you let me know the titles. I liked that in DOTT and would be keen on rying other games with such a feature. Fair comment about characters swopping inventory items (the original Maniac Mansion for example ) but it was the swopping across time periods I considered unique.

Sure, there are often words that serve similar functions. But one is not intrinsically better than another. Anyway, I understand you don't like it, but that's different from claiming it's somehow definitively wrong.

My argument is that "unique" was never intended to serve the same function as rare. It's just come to be an acceptable dictionary definition because of repeated incorrect usage. It''s not the only word whose meaning has become more fuzzy and ill-defined through inappropriate usage over the years either.

I know, I sound like an old fogey (people used words properly when I was young ) I just feel that the wider a definition a word acquires, the less value it has in clear communication. How can you be sure what someone means by a particular word if it has a wide range of definitions?

[Wormsie]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

How can you be sure what someone means by a particular word if it has a wide range of definitions?

Often it's defined by the context. Just using common sense might do the trick, too.

[Marek]

Can we stop argueing about grammar?

[Wormsie]

Originally Posted by Marek

Can we stop argueing about grammar?

It's grammer.

[Fairygdmther]

Actually, grammar is correct, it's arguing not argueing!

FGM

[Jackal]

The languague police are everywhere.

Anyway, I agree. Didn't mean for this to snowball. Just wanted to defend the phrase as accepted/acceptable word use. Can't have people thinking AG don't know how to speak good.

Also:

Spoiler:

Yes, time travel puzzles where changing one time affects another have been done in other games. Journeyman Project games were like that. You didn't SEND items, but you carried them between timelines. Not sure if any were before DOTT, however.

Now, about DOTT and Chris' review...

[Wormsie]

Originally Posted by Fairygdmther

Actually, grammar is correct, it's arguing not argueing!

It's actualy and its.

[Fairygdmther]

Why you little worm, you - I'm going to get your Daddy to spank you! Now behave! wormsie

Ahem, could we please have Mr. Remo assigned to more writing pieces? He does very well and has a fresh perspective that I enjoy.


FGM

[remixor]

I'm perfectly happy and willing to write anything for AG that happens to be assigned to me, but for the most part I do more writing for the Thumb.

[Bastich]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Spoiler:

Yes, time travel puzzles where changing one time affects another have been done in other games. Journeyman Project games were like that. You didn't SEND items, but you carried them between timelines. Not sure if any were before DOTT, however.

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1984) had time travel in it via the improbability drive, requiring you to do things in the past to change the future.

Even more so, Trinity (1986) had you narrowly escaping a nuclear blast into a fantasy world where you open doors to various places in the past such as Nagasaki, the U.S.S.R, US nuclear testing sites, or the future in space with Reagan's Star Wars satellites, etc., and also required changing the past to affect the future, or in some cases making sure that past events occurred that matched the results as you experienced them in the future.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by Jackal

The languague police are everywhere.

Anyway, I agree. Didn't mean for this to snowball. Just wanted to defend the phrase as accepted/acceptable word use. Can't have people thinking AG don't know how to speak good.

Also:

Spoiler:

Yes, time travel puzzles where changing one time affects another have been done in other games. Journeyman Project games were like that. You didn't SEND items, but you carried them between timelines. Not sure if any were before DOTT, however.

Now, about DOTT and Chris' review...

OK, I give. I'll just have to mutter darkly to myself in a corner somewhere. Apologies. Didn't mean for this to snowball myself.

The great thing about this review is it highlights this great game for a new generation of AGers. This is a game that's dated quite well because it's cartoon-like graphics don't suffer as badly with age as more "realistic" games. Well done for bringing this game back to the forefront in such a well-rounded way.

Originally Posted by Bastich

[i]
Even more so, Trinity (1986) had you narrowly escaping a nuclear blast into a fantasy world where you open doors to various places in the past such as Nagasaki, the U.S.S.R, US nuclear testing sites, or the future in space with Reagan's Star Wars satellites, etc., and also required changing the past to affect the future, or in some cases making sure that past events occurred that matched the results as you experienced them in the future.

Trinity! One of the best text adventures ever made.

Yes, I've said it before. I'll say it again.