Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
It may be a different take on the old game, until I can see the pieces crawl up that wall and beat the crap out of each other like they could on the Amiga in 1988 (Battle Chess), this just does not compare.
Yes, I should write for Modern Jackass (one who claims knowledge of an are that really is not my expertise)
Traditionally, the king should be the height of 2 squares. The queen, only as tall as the king, less the cross. Some argue that the height of the king and queen should be the same height, 2 squares, with the kings cross projecting above the second square by no more than a quarter of one square. The base should cover 3/4ths the square.
The pieces don't follow these "rules". From the photo, using Pixelmator, the rectangles are not multiples of smallest side, or 2x*x. The bases look to be 1/2 or <1/2 the shortest side of a "square".
In short, it looks wonky because it's different, the scale conventions we are used to were not followed or scaled appropriately, and lastly the frame, may further skew our perspective.
(I sold games for a living for a while.)
And a note just for Bosskev- have a happy veagany Thanks Giving feast.
@DeadWriter: "And a note just for Bosskev- have a happy veagany Thanks Giving feast."
* near-dumbstruck *
* still near-dumbstruck *
Wow. I mean, just, wow. How could you possible remember that trivia about me? Thanks.
Yeah, I've already laid in plenty of soybean-based turkey slices (don't wretch, everybody, the particular brand I buy is not the gag-worthy "tofurky" crap you see hawked in grocery stores, what I get is actually very good).
Oh, and all that other stuff you were saying about chess proportions? Umm, yeah, I have no idea. All I know about is squares. And, you? Yeah, you're a geek. ;^)
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
Good luck trying to penetrate my defenses. And no castling either.
I'm moving my King's pawn up one.
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
...and possibly share one beautiful Knight together?
11/26/08
Nobody expects Da Bishop.
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
You may be onto something. They are already amassing fortunes as spokescreatures for car insurance.
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
11/26/08
Yes, I should write for Modern Jackass (one who claims knowledge of an are that really is not my expertise)
Traditionally, the king should be the height of 2 squares. The queen, only as tall as the king, less the cross. Some argue that the height of the king and queen should be the same height, 2 squares, with the kings cross projecting above the second square by no more than a quarter of one square. The base should cover 3/4ths the square.
The pieces don't follow these "rules". From the photo, using Pixelmator, the rectangles are not multiples of smallest side, or 2x*x. The bases look to be 1/2 or <1/2 the shortest side of a "square".
In short, it looks wonky because it's different, the scale conventions we are used to were not followed or scaled appropriately, and lastly the frame, may further skew our perspective.
(I sold games for a living for a while.)
And a note just for Bosskev- have a happy veagany Thanks Giving feast.
11/26/08
* near-dumbstruck *
* still near-dumbstruck *
Wow. I mean, just, wow. How could you possible remember that trivia about me? Thanks.
Yeah, I've already laid in plenty of soybean-based turkey slices (don't wretch, everybody, the particular brand I buy is not the gag-worthy "tofurky" crap you see hawked in grocery stores, what I get is actually very good).
Oh, and all that other stuff you were saying about chess proportions? Umm, yeah, I have no idea. All I know about is squares. And, you? Yeah, you're a geek. ;^)