14.05.2010, 20:18
For me it is very important that the puzzle-portal provides puzzle solvers with specialty-products. The puzzles that are in the portal will have to be different than those in magazines. That can be in three different ways.
- Type;
- Difficulty;
- Size.
A lot of my own puzzles wouldn't fit in a regular puzzle magazine.
I think it's important to keep renewing, and make puzzles with an 'Aha-erlebnis'. Also I think puzzles will have to be solvable by logic alone (now and then mayb very well hidden logic ;-)
I realise that it is not easy, and creativity will come to an end once. Or not?
If people want to solve a standard puzzle, they simply can buy the new issue of 'Breinbrekers' (in Holland) or 'LOGISCH', or a similar magazine (I don't know if there similar magazines in Germany).
When every now and then a standard puzzle appears, that's no problem, but I would prefer it if the portal stays unique for it's uniqueness of it's puzzles. The fact that more people post their puzzles is only a warm welcome.
For uniqueness I think it's good that not too much puzzles of the same type are published (at least at the same time).
{Apologies for my seven puenktchen sudokus; even when it is in a period of 1,5 years}.
I can imagine that newbies look to the massive amount of available puzzles and don't know where to start, and it will keep growing. But not only newbies have to be pleased, of course we have a big group of regular solvers, and they need new puzzles. So maybe it would be a good idea to have only the most recent puzzles available for the statistics of a top-100. We could put all the older ones in an 'archive, by author or type', and only show the most recent 200 ones in the top-100. In that way new people don't get frustrated immediately at the beginning.
For me personally: I stopped solving exactly because of the reasons described by uvo: too much meta-puzzles, too much puzzles with instructions more than half a page and too much T&E-puzzles.
But no worries: I don't have plans to stop publishing my puzzles.
Regards, Richard
- Type;
- Difficulty;
- Size.
A lot of my own puzzles wouldn't fit in a regular puzzle magazine.
I think it's important to keep renewing, and make puzzles with an 'Aha-erlebnis'. Also I think puzzles will have to be solvable by logic alone (now and then mayb very well hidden logic ;-)
I realise that it is not easy, and creativity will come to an end once. Or not?
If people want to solve a standard puzzle, they simply can buy the new issue of 'Breinbrekers' (in Holland) or 'LOGISCH', or a similar magazine (I don't know if there similar magazines in Germany).
When every now and then a standard puzzle appears, that's no problem, but I would prefer it if the portal stays unique for it's uniqueness of it's puzzles. The fact that more people post their puzzles is only a warm welcome.
For uniqueness I think it's good that not too much puzzles of the same type are published (at least at the same time).
{Apologies for my seven puenktchen sudokus; even when it is in a period of 1,5 years}.
I can imagine that newbies look to the massive amount of available puzzles and don't know where to start, and it will keep growing. But not only newbies have to be pleased, of course we have a big group of regular solvers, and they need new puzzles. So maybe it would be a good idea to have only the most recent puzzles available for the statistics of a top-100. We could put all the older ones in an 'archive, by author or type', and only show the most recent 200 ones in the top-100. In that way new people don't get frustrated immediately at the beginning.
For me personally: I stopped solving exactly because of the reasons described by uvo: too much meta-puzzles, too much puzzles with instructions more than half a page and too much T&E-puzzles.
But no worries: I don't have plans to stop publishing my puzzles.
Regards, Richard