Message #2446

From: Melinda Green <>
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Re: I’m solving the 600-cell
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:20:00 -0700

That’s it! I never liked that game too much but I was looking for the
title in case Nan might like to use it to name his method. My favorite
game was Battle Zone, followed by Asteroids. I very nearly had my own
restored Battle Zone but the restoration didn’t work out. The graphics
were all wireframe models where the electron gun would stroke out
beautiful lines directly as opposed to raster displays with discrete
pixels. The immersive sound was awesome too. Later on, SGI implemented a
shaded, color, raster networked demo version based on a team-based
version of "capture the flag". When I worked at Autodesk, everyone who
had access to an SGI machine would log-in at 5 PM for epic battles.


On 10/30/2012 2:09 PM, Roice Nelson wrote:
> The video game is "Tempest". I recognized your description quickly
> because we have a restored full-size version of this at my work :D
> <>
> I’d like to add my congrats to the chorus. Awesome job Nan! And
> awesome job Ed for hitting the 200 mark in MagicTile! You guys are
> incredible.
> Cheers,
> Roice
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Melinda Green
> < <>> wrote:
> Hello Nan,
> Thanks for the description of the puzzle and your solution
> approach. I like your idea of solving the "nearest" (surface)
> parts first. The analogy to 3D is to reorient the puzzle when you
> do not need to. Your technique of sending pieces straight towards
> the middle (the far side) is new to me and seems like a very
> clever idea. It reminds me of a classic video game where you would
> move your ship (or whatever that thing was) around the perimeter
> of a polygonal opening of a sort of tube viewed edge on. Maybe
> some enemy ships would be climbing out of the tube and your goal
> was to drop bombs down the side of the tube to hit them.
> Unfortunately I can’t remember the game’s name but maybe someone
> else will.
> I agree that the "simplified" 600-cell sounds like the best
> definition of the proper puzzle. I agree that what you call the
> "topologically correct" form is best. Geometrically defined cuts
> give a fine way to begin to create a puzzle but I do not see a
> good reason to insist that that always results the best puzzle
> description.
> So what will you do next? Shall we ask Andrey to create an
> omnitruncated 600-cell
> <>
> puzzle for you? :-)
> Best,
> -Melinda