151–160 of 245 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you looked at the source? With the exception of the two minimized libraries, none of this code is obfuscated in the least. It even has comments in it!
Yes, just looking at the html page source is what I did, but then at first sight I couldn't tell if those other .js where part of a known modular js framework or not, since as I said I am not familiar with those.
Here's something I consider a problem: If you're in the cave, and something attacks you, at the end if you press "eat meat", sometimes, exactly at the point when you want to click it, the buttons become "leave cave" instead, and you accidently press that. Then, a next fight may begin, and you're at low health. Please provide some consistent way to heal yourself before a next fight.
If the combat action buttons didn't self organize, but rather sat in the same spot (perhaps in order of discovery?), then combat frantic clicking could be consistent.
Also, sometimes the tooltip that shows the cost of a "shoot" hangs over the "eat meat" button, leading to unclickable death if you're almost dead. Clicking the tooltip doesn't shoot, nor does it yield increased health. Either behavior would be preferable to nothing.
Unfortunately, this game seems to be browser-based and requires javascript to work -- so I'm going to pass.
Didn't making your post also require a browser? You prefer running a binary to play a game?
Unfortunately, this game seems to be browser-based and requires javascript to work -- so I'm going to pass.
Get a burner machine or something. I've yet to have a js-based security problem.
You mean you have yet to become aware that your browser has been owned through some Javascript exploit.
Somehow that isn't very comforting to me.
Unfortunately, this game seems to be browser-based and requires javascript to work -- so I'm going to pass.
I'm starting to feel like no-javascript-guy is some type of HN novelty account. Seriously man, not a single person here cares that you don't use javascript. Move on.
More to the point, if at least you didn't care, then why did you comment?
Why didn't you "just move on"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm starting to feel like no-javascript-guy is some type of HN novelty account. Seriously man, not a single person here cares that you don't use javascript. Move on.
I strongly disagree. Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code, but it's equally ridiculous for non-interactive pages to need javascript. I've seen pages with the entire content in the html, set to invisible, that needed javascript to turn the text black. That is shameful web development. It shouldn't take 10 billion clock cycles to make the page appear. Html, css, javascrip…
You know, not everything that needs code needs to be run in a web browser.
Is it really so ridiculous of me to oppose opening my browser up to Javascript exploits and spying by the likes of GoogleAPI?
I'd be happy to run the game in any of the standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], and Inform7[3] out there that this particular game might have been written in. And I would have had no problem playing it then.
[1] - http://frotz.sourceforge.net/
[2] - http://www.logicalshift.co.uk/unix/zoom/
[3] - http://inform7.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I strongly disagree. Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code, but it's equally ridiculous for non-interactive pages to need javascript. I've seen pages with the entire content in the html, set to invisible, that needed javascript to turn the text black. That is shameful web development. It shouldn't take 10 billion clock cycles to make the page appear. Html, css, javascrip…
> But again, it's only valid to complain about/mock javascript on non-interactive pages like blogs. Which is a bit part of the point of this, it is an interactive page. Though again I'll disagree further and say it isn't valid at all to simply complain and mock. A reasonable discussion on usage of javascript, or browser-based applications would be worth having. Just saying "not gonna use it" isn't interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I strongly disagree. Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code, but it's equally ridiculous for non-interactive pages to need javascript. I've seen pages with the entire content in the html, set to invisible, that needed javascript to turn the text black. That is shameful web development. It shouldn't take 10 billion clock cycles to make the page appear. Html, css, javascrip…
"Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code" You know, not everything that needs code needs to be run in a web browser. Is it really so ridiculous of me to oppose opening my browser up to Javascript exploits and spying by the likes of GoogleAPI? I'd be happy to run the game in any of the standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm starting to feel like no-javascript-guy is some type of HN novelty account. Seriously man, not a single person here cares that you don't use javascript. Move on.
If no one cares, why are there dozens of replies to this thread? More to the point, if at least you didn't care, then why did you comment? Why didn't you "just move on"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code" You know, not everything that needs code needs to be run in a web browser. Is it really so ridiculous of me to oppose opening my browser up to Javascript exploits and spying by the likes of GoogleAPI? I'd be happy to run the game in any of the standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], an…
Standalone engines are subject to fewer attacks from untrusted code, so they're probably easier to exploit than a browser. So I can't really agree with you on a security perspective. And incognito mode / using a separate browser profile / portable browser installs are all options to completely preserve privacy that are either as convenient or more convenient than installing an interactive fiction engine.
Probably? This is purely speculative.
I'd be interested to see any actual exploits of Interactive Fiction engines. So far, they are a much less attractive target to malware authors than web browsers are. That alone makes me prefer them over web browsers, no matter what their theoretical vulnerabilities may be.
"incognito mode / using a separate browser profile / portable browser installs are all options to completely preserve privacy"
Users are often tracked by their IP addresses as well as OS and browser fingerprinting, which Javascript can facilitate. Try going to Panopticlick[1] with Javascript turned off and then with it turned on and see the difference.
"that are either as convenient or more convenient than installing an interactive fiction engine."
But I already have multiple Interactive Fiction engines installed, so using them is perfectly convenient for me. As for others, how many people do you think actually bother to use a separate browser profile or even "incognito mode"? Not a hell of a lot. And if they do, they might also do what I do and disable Javascript altogether.