Sure, I'm all for flogging a dead horse:
From Tigger's First Post:
I want each room to be logically connected to the next in a linear fashion. By that, I mean the player follows a straight path from one room to the next.
I'm developing a sort of children's riddle game.
The primary objective is to solve one puzzle before you can proceed to the next room.
Users can't skip rooms along the path.
If, and only if, the player provides the correct answer to the current room's puzzle, he may proceed to the next room.
(...and so on)
Ron Newcomb's first reply:
Sounds like you're making a choose-your-own-adventure.
Tigger's FIRST reply back to Ron (verbatim):
Not quite. Remember that my story path is completely linear. There will be no forking or choosing of paths.
You appear in "Room 1". The only way to get to "Room 2" is to solve Room 1's riddle. For argument's sake, let's say there are 10 rooms until you end. To "win" the game, each and every room must be completed in order.
Ron's reply (he still thinks, for some reason, that Tigger is making a CYOA):
Eh? One path goes forward, the other loops back with a hint...
Tigger's 2nd attempt (3rd overall) to explain his game concept. Directed at Ron:
Hehe. Nice try, but no.
That's not what most people refer to when they say "CYOA".
My "plot-line" (if you can call it that) cannot get any more linear. I am not looking to choose-your-own-anything. In case my first post wasn't clear, the player is to flow from one room to the next. The outcome of the game is fixed.
Displaying a 1-line hint (which is not a requirement, by the way) while within a room does not count as "looping back". Looping back implies that you have already left the room.
Sensing that Ron needs help with his failed CYOA argument, tove steps in and thinks he can lend a helping hand:
Your objective may not be exactly what most people mean when they say CYOA (no spaceships or pirates), but it has more in common structurally with CYOA than it does with world-modeled IF. In any given room -- which cannot be re-visited after exiting, even -- there is a "choice": the correct answer, or any of the wrong ones. This is true even if you haven't listed the answers out ("1. Banana 2. Apple 3. Orangutan"). The correct answer takes you forward, and the wrong answer keeps you in place (or "loops back" to... exactly where you are). Without that loop, you'd have a game that allows the player to progress regardless of what answer they give, and that doesn't sound like what you're thinking of.
Notice the number of mistakes tove makes here. #1. Since "CYOA" doesn't apply to my GAME (and he knows it) he is going to try to start up another argument (for reasons known only to him) by saying that my CODE has similarities to CYOA. Unfortunately, for reasons I've already outlined, describing CODE as CYOA is not very helpful, nor is it descriptive. CYOA describes gameplay, not source code. #2. He actually believes (or wants you to believe) that since my code is not similar to IF, then it must be similar to CYOA. False dichotomy. #3. (This is my favourite). tove thinks that "guessing the correct answer to a riddle" counts as Choosing Your Own Adventure because "there is a choice: the correct answer, or any of the wrong ones". Not only is tove's definition of CYOA mistaken, but clearly his definition of "choice" is out of whack, too. Recall my example from my FIRST POST: if I ask you "what does 2+2 equal?" you do NOT have a choice
of answers. Good try, though. #4. He believes that staying still is the same as looping back. I'm not really sure what the hell he's driving at here, but it's obviously false. I was crystal clear in my descriptions: you REMAIN in the room until you answer the riddle. There is no looping back, because you've never left your starting point. You really put on your thinking cap for that one. Bravo.
I won't quote the rest of the posts, since they're all pretty much the same - weak arguments that are actually trying to defend (but fail at) describing my game as a CYOA.
Seriously folks, thanks for the laugh. I needed that.