Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Has anyone been able to unlock Zillions of Games to the full version? I didn't hear back from them when I e-mailed the support team. Guess they haven't been keeping their URL up to date, regarding the unlock order/purchase online. Unfortunate, as there are some newer variants I wanted to try on the full version.
Thanks for the advice. I did actually e-mail them yesterday but have yet to hear back. I'll have to see about getting a CD somehow.
The website is still around. I bought my unlock key many years ago, and I'm not in any position to answer your question. You should contact Zillions-of-Games directly about this. Even if you can't get an unlock key, you may be able to buy a used version of the software on CD.
I was trying to unlock the full version and purchase an unlock key online. However, after the first screen and I click Next, it reads "URL not found" regardless of which browser I try. Anyone know about this? Is Zillions still around and working?
[This comment is hidden pending review. It will eventually be deleted or displayed.]
Uh, what kind of PC is Zillions of Games supposed to run on, anyway? Are you sure it will run on mine? Is it DOS compatible? My PC is a used one from 1988, worth maybe $10 to 20 bucks or so.
I think it's a 'bandwidth' question. Minimal graphics means maximum throughput, whereas maximum graphics means minimal throughput, especially for those of us who depend on Internet Service from an IP, and find ourselves unpleasantly slowed down from the lag associated with a webbrowsing reeling from complex graphics directives, GIF or JPEG displays, and so on. Now, I don't speak for zz038, but I do think it's wonderful that Zillions of Games exists; it is wonderful that it can play so many games. It's just that, speaking for myself, I prefer minimal graphics to maximum graphics. Internet seems to run faster the leaner you make it.
If the algorithms, information, and programming manual were public on site somewhere I could find, anyone could program their own program to emulate Zillions. I would use it, even if it cost some money to use. Maybe if they don't want all lose money, they could make a license to say 'You can't distribute programs that use this algorithms because is patented', but I disagree with the fact that you can patent computer programs anyway.
I have the time to post it, now. I'd also like to point out that the method is probably more Peter Aronson's and Jeff Mallett's than mine (except I think for the unlinked squares method), since I would not found it if I had not discussed my concerns with them. In the game definition section, put in (turn order (White real-move) (Black real-move)) Then, in each piece's definition, put in (moves (move-type real-move) (leap2 n ne) etc., putting in what definitions you normally would for that piece. Then, still in the same moves section put in (move-type pseudo-move) (add add add) the more 'add's you put in, the greater the inflated piece value. And because they are pseudo-moves and not real-moves, they will never actually be generated. If a single 'add' inflates the value too much, you can put in duplicates of the moves used to define the piece. In fact, if you stick to using only duplicates of the piece's definition, you don't need the two move-types at all. In my orthochess zrf, for example, I have added a single extra (leap2 n ne) to the move section of the knight so that Zillions now values it as almost worth a bishop. I use the two move-types in my highly unorthodox variant because I often need to put in long strings of 'add's to adjust piece values by huge amounts and it's easier than duplicating long strings of piece moves. You should not put in any moves that are not either simple 'add's or duplicates of the piece's move, though, even if you are using the two move-types, because of a bug I found and that was confirmed by Jeff. Zillions will look at the pseudo-move definitions when determining check, even though the pieces can not actual make those moves because of the turn-order. Another method you can try is to create an extra file on your board and then unlink the squares. In your board def macro, add a /z to the files string and then unlink the squares with (unlink z1 z2 z3 z4 z5 z6 z7 z8). Now in your pseudo-move section, you can put in things like (z1 add) or if that adds too much value you can try (z1 (if empty? add)) which seems to add less value than a simple add. Experiment. And with the unlinked squares method you don't have to worry about the check bug since the king can never be on z1 because it would take a pseudo-move to get there and a pseudo-move will never be generated. This method might give you more flexibility because you don't have to stick to simple 'add's or duplicate moves. I hope those who read this can make use of it. Regards, Mike
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.

I tried a few weeks ago and could not. :-(
I was really looking forward to playing a few against the computer, too.
That said, I've been having a great time with game courier!