Talk:FreeCell
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| No | This article is on a subject of no priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
I believe the original creator of Freecell placed the game creation algorithm in the public domain. If someone can track it down and it's not too large (I've seen it before and don't recall it being overly large) perhaps it would be a nice addition to the page. Bonalaw 15:01, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Jim Horne's Shuffling Algorithm
The shuffling algorithm of MS Freecell depends on the Microsoft C compilers' randomization routines. A complete implementation (with its own random number generator emulating the Microsoft one) capable of generating such boards is available as part of Freecell Solver (as board_gen/pi_make_microsoft_freecell_board.c.
From the revision history comment by dfmclean requesting discussion here justifying my changes. Most specifically he took issue with the game number issue. The Windows shuffle number generator was already discussed in the above paragraph. While a few popular open source implementations have chosen to use the same shuffling algorithm for consistent game numbers, countless minor implementations do not. The original versions of the game, for example, used a completely different random number generator. See the reference in the article to the discussion with the game creator for that. Also during the earlier edit, I had moved the citation along with the relevant portion of about the game numbers. I kept your additional comment about the numbered game generators, but removed the duplicate ref and also removed the erroneous assertion that the game is strikingly similar to Klondike. About the only similarity is that they use a single deck of cards; consider the completely different implementations of movable tableaus, use of cells, allowing any card into empty cascades, and a radically different opening layout. I also removed a confusing statement about how some games are possibly unbeatable (many are provably unbeatable) and how other games are also unbeatable. The article even describes two such unbeatable games using the -1 and -2 game numbers in Windows. Bwagstaff 04:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree that the game is nothing like Klondike (even my edit removed that ridiculous assertion). I still think that the summary should have more information about the nature of the game - most especially the fact that very few games are unsolvable but that for a given implementation, many of the unsolvable games are well known. Dfmclean 17:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Number of possible games
Since only the number of cards distinguishes one column from another, the number of possible games is actually 52!/(4!)2, or about 1.4x1065. Hv 15:23, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Minor variant
I originally learnt this game slightly differently: the cards are dealt 7 to each of the 8 columns, and the remaining 4 cards are dealt into the cells. This makes the game slightly harder; I don't know if there is a separate name for this variation. Hv 15:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
- No, there is not a separate name. The game was originally a different sized board, with 8 cascades of cards becoming standard later on. This detail has been added to the article. --Bwagstaff 04:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Missing rule or explanation
In the rule section it is not explaned if or which cards can be placed in an empty column. My understanding is that ANY card can be placed in an empty column, but it could also be only Kings?
- It is indeed ANY card. --Bonalaw 07:35, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] win32s and best of microsoft entertainment pack
a win16 version of Freecell is included in best of microsoft entertainment pack. Does this pre-date the version that came with win32s. (unsigned by Plugwash 13:31, 14 October 2005)
- The CIX freecell conference was started on 17th May 1995, with the introduction:
- This conference has been created to mastermind an attempt to prove Microsoft's assertion that all freecell games are solvable.
- Comparing against the dates in List of Microsoft Windows versions, this suggests it was first introduced no later than Windows NT 3.5, and in particular before Windows NT 3.51 or Windows 95. Hv 15:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- The Entertainment Pack Freecell About Box: Freecell/by Jim Horne/Copyright 1991 Microsoft Corp. 24.185.31.111 02:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] image
The image on the freecell page isn't freecell, its Solitaire! This should be changed asap because it's completely inaccurate.
thers also this image in the commons
The windows image is copyrighted.Since we have an alternative i think that fair use don't aply.I propose to deleat the windows image.--Pixel ;-) 02:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- No comment on which to use, but we certainly don't need two images that are basically the same. 2005 02:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- Originaly i replaced the windows image,but someone reverted me.So i simply added the gpl image as a temporery mesure.If you mean that thers two kde images of freecel in the commons, i'm ok with you, that one can go.--Pixel ;-) 02:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- That image is ugly, wtf!!! Shandristhe azylean 08:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ugliness is irrelevant. Please see the third pillar of Wikipedia, and read the article on free content. Fair use images may only be used when no free replacement is possible. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 19:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- personally i think we should have images of the windows version since that is the original that the article is primerally about. Of course we should have images of free versions as well both to show that there are other vendors and for the benifit or resuers who reject fair use images. Plugwash 00:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- What information would our readers gain? It's basically identical to the KDE version except it has the Windows-style GUI and a slightly different background. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 18:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- i added a new Vista image. but as i was tired. i realised it was normal solitare... oops... but its pretty! --Yoshi navi t 11:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- i agree we need each OS's editon... so people dont think certian ones are better. as most people are stoopid :-P --Yoshi navi t 11:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- i added a new Vista image. but as i was tired. i realised it was normal solitare... oops... but its pretty! --Yoshi navi t 11:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- What information would our readers gain? It's basically identical to the KDE version except it has the Windows-style GUI and a slightly different background. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 18:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- That image is ugly, wtf!!! Shandristhe azylean 08:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Game 517,776
The following comments were moved from the article page
- Edit: game 517,776 is most certainly beatable
- If game 517,776 is beatable, as is claimed, the person making the claim should provide proof of the moves that beat it. See the Freecell website for move-coding conventions. I have tried the game about 10 times, and regard it as unbeatable.
I found [1], which posted the list of "unsolveable" games in 2005. Several people doubted it and said they would try to beat them, but there was no reported success.
Matchups 03:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
The first 'unbeatable' game is also beatable.
[edit] Chinese Windows version of FreeCell
Chinese Windows version of freecell is called 新接龍 probably someone can make a page for it? --(Blckbird2002 16:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC))
[edit] Sources
Sources are needed for this article. Anyone know where that information on the single unbeatable game came from in the introduction?Lasdlt 20:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- I cited a source for that... there are several webpages just about that game, apparently [2] --W.marsh 21:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
There are not, however, any source that I have found that contain or cite a proof that 11,982 is unbeatable. The fact that numerous computer solvers have been unable to beat it is not an actual proof. Dfmclean (talk) 20:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- Somewhere I saw a claim that some of the solvers that failed to find soloutions had done an exhaustive search. If true that means the game is indeed unsolvable. Plugwash (talk) 16:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- For something as simple as a single FreeCell game, I have no objection to considering a verifiable reference to an exhaustive search to be a proof. Just because I could not find it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I put up my first comment in this thread hoping that someone would have such a reference handy so that we could put this stupid thing to rest. Dfmclean (talk) 16:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] -1 and -2
-1 and -2 are actually impossible to complete. 217.44.164.30 (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removing Sesame Seeds
Consider what "Joel on Software" says about gradually removing sesame seeds from Hamburger buns and look at this diff to the article from my latest edit to the present. As you can see, a lot of material was mercilessly removed and the article now sucks much more than it did then. I don't know whether this is the work of one editor or a gradual change, but it certainly sucks. For example, the "Solvers" contain one dangling paragraph.
As a result, I think what I'll do now, is retrieve both versions, and merge them manually.
Shlomif (talk) 06:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Difficulty section
I have two issues with the section on difficulty:
- The section is mostly about Minesweeper, not FreeCell.
- The section isn't clear about the difficulty level of Minesweeper: From my understanding, it isn't the Minesweeper game itself that has been shown to be provably hard — it is the problem of establishing whether or not a given minesweeper state (map, position, whatever it is called) is consistent. I don't think the section does a good job of making the distinction. SlowJog (talk) 18:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
