After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 710614 - Let me put a tile in the wrong place
Let me put a tile in the wrong place
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: gnome-tetravex
Classification: Applications
Component: general
git master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gnome-tetravex-maint
gnome-tetravex-maint
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2013-10-22 08:47 UTC by Allan Day
Modified: 2014-06-02 16:22 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Allan Day 2013-10-22 08:47:36 UTC
If I try to put a tile in the wrong place, it springs back to its original position. This feels surprising and unfriendly. It also gets in the way - sometimes you need to move a tile into an incorrect position as you rearrange the board.

Perhaps it would be possible to allow tiles to be placed in the wrong position, but indicate that they don't fit? They could do an unhappy little shake when you place them, for example.
Comment 1 Michael Catanzaro 2013-10-22 16:04:45 UTC
This would be a significant gameplay change.  I'm neither in favor nor opposed; just pointing it out.
Comment 2 Mario Wenzel 2013-10-27 10:21:41 UTC
I feel that allowing incorrect placement, the game loses its self-explainatory nature. The rules become apparent after a few seconds. If incorrect placements are allowed, I don't know the connections. Need the numbers be different? The top one larger?
Nobody reads the help-text explaining the game.
Comment 3 Michael Catanzaro 2014-05-30 17:13:23 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> I feel that allowing incorrect placement, the game loses its self-explainatory
> nature. The rules become apparent after a few seconds. If incorrect placements
> are allowed, I don't know the connections. Need the numbers be different? The
> top one larger?

I think it's best if we continue to disallow incorrect placements.
Comment 4 Allan Day 2014-06-02 08:12:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> I feel that allowing incorrect placement, the game loses its self-explainatory
> nature. ...

Aren't the rules obvious from the tiles themselves though? It never felt ambiguous to me.
Comment 5 Michael Catanzaro 2014-06-02 13:14:23 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Aren't the rules obvious from the tiles themselves though? It never felt
> ambiguous to me.

I agree that it's fairly obvious. On the other hand, I thought Lights Off was obvious as well until I learned otherwise. :)

How would the user know that an unhappy wiggle is an unhappy wiggle, rather than a successful wiggle? There's much less potential for confusion if we just disallow illegal moves altogether, and I'm uncertain there would be much benefit. You never need to move a piece to an invalid position to solve a puzzle: you can always move it back to the right side of the board. (I've just added a shortcut to do this faster by double-clicking on a piece.)
Comment 6 Mario Wenzel 2014-06-02 16:22:28 UTC
>There's much less potential for confusion if we just
>disallow illegal moves altogether

I even think that the game is a different game if we change it.

Currently the win-condition is: "Place all tiles from the right side into the left side". This is a simple win condition. And then we restrict placement of tiles where sides don't match. That all the sides fit is not actually part of the win-condition. Having placed all the tiles is sufficient.

If we were to change it, the win-condition is: "Place all tiles from the right side into the left side in a permutation so that for every tile's side, the adjacent tile's corresponding side shows the same number". This seems like a complicated game now.

So I would, again, strongly side witch Michael on that one.