madhatter5 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:34 pm
m5rammy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 1:15 pm
I appreciate all the effort that goes into making these, and that we can do them for free.
But personally I feel the whole solving process should all be contained in the puzzle (grid, title, clues [hopefully not Only in the clues]), and not "you actually have to go somewhere else to find the solution". (I don't mean googling to help solve specific clues, we can't all know everything)
A number of recent puzzles were like that .
![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
Just sayin'
Although this time, I guess there is some warning.
Other than that I liked the puzzle.
Thanks m5rammy! Given your comment as well as Chris' I'd be interested to know what others think - do you guys prefer more "traditional" metas on "traditional" grids? If so I'll head more in that direction.
I am a relatively recent addition to meta-solving (started with the first WSJ meta), so I haven't been doing them long enough to be bored with the traditional sort, whatever that is. Even the most traditional of the traditionals sometimes give me an insurmountable challenge. I am always grateful to see a meta that uses a technique I've seen before (and am so proud that I've remembered it!).
However, I am reminded of successful musicians who become bored with their long-time hits, that all the world loves (and that's why it's a hit), so when they perform the long-time hits, they make some changes to the presentation. The musicians are artistically pleased, because they have changed things enough so that they are no longer bored. But, some in the audience are disappointed, and they say, "I came to hear the original hit, not this blankedy-blank mangled version."
So, a non-traditional meta will likely please the proficient solvers who want more of a challenge. And a traditional meta will please the rest of us who are still struggling with the basics. (I'd recommend a mix.)