July 10, 2002 2:47 PM   Subscribe

evil! eviiiiiiiiiiil! a flash game most diabolical. is there a way to win?
posted by jcterminal (16 comments total)
hmm, the next time i want to feel like a stupid loser with the need for someone to laugh at me, i'll go back to this game. hehe
posted by RubiX^3 at 3:17 PM on July 10, 2002

I'm not entirely sure if an activity with a pre-determined outcome can be considered a "game." It's like Tic-Tac-Toe...if you go first and you don't do anything stupid, you'll ... uh ... 'win'.
posted by mathis23 at 3:28 PM on July 10, 2002

And if one insists on doing something stupid every single time? What about us, smart guy?
posted by Skot at 3:41 PM on July 10, 2002

Try to break your habit and vote Democratic in the next election. Oh...and put safety plugs in your unused outlets.
posted by mathis23 at 3:54 PM on July 10, 2002

It's like Tic-Tac-Toe...if you go first and you don't do anything stupid, you'll ... uh ... 'win'.

Close, but no cigar. This game is indeed, impossible to win (it's a classic, although I've temporarily forgotten it's name). However, Tic-Tac-Toe, if played properly, always results in a draw.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 4:12 PM on July 10, 2002

There is a second game called Pearls Before Swine Pt. 2 where you can force him to go first.

I'm still losing though.
posted by perplexed at 4:18 PM on July 10, 2002

It's Nim. And yes, it's impossible for you to win.

Other people can win. But you? Impossible.

(Seriously: here's the poop.)
posted by Shadowkeeper at 4:23 PM on July 10, 2002

Actually..... I won the first game by simply following moves from Part II. Start Part II, and go first by removing all the pearls from the row with the most pearls. Then just copy everything he does in Part II as your moves in Part I. You'll lose Part II, but you'll win Part I.
posted by aznblader at 4:33 PM on July 10, 2002

Brilliant aznblader! It reminds me of how you can play a strong game of email chess against two grandmasters: Use the moves one gives you to play the other!

BTW, Both Part I and Part II are winnable.
posted by vacapinta at 4:44 PM on July 10, 2002

It's simple.
posted by vacapinta at 4:49 PM on July 10, 2002

oops. This is a Nim variation. Sorry. The correct strategy is here.
posted by vacapinta at 4:55 PM on July 10, 2002

I did aznblader's trick and won, but there's a point when there are three rows with five total pearls left where the computer should remove just one more pearl to win. I can't see how the game is winnable without this flaw.

I was nice to see the bastard lose though!
posted by mblandi at 8:50 PM on July 10, 2002

Uh, I just won on my second try without sneaking a look at any strategies or Part II's. Is something wrong with me?
posted by Tubes at 9:40 PM on July 10, 2002

i read the related methods and rules of play; did what i guess was the correct move, and won.

but i still don't think i get it.
posted by folktrash at 10:54 PM on July 10, 2002

Some people are better at these games than others. I could always beat practically anyone else at "Mastermind", but I knew a kid who could cream me so easily I bored him. (His dad, a science professor, was his only worthy opponent.) I enjoy chess but I've never been really good at it -- especially at the level where you have to memorize a zillion openings.
posted by dhartung at 11:15 PM on July 10, 2002

i can't do it. i want to kill this bastard.
posted by catatonic at 10:16 AM on July 12, 2002

« Older   |   Really Old Skull debases "Out of Africa" theory. .... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments