Interesting article on game design
Kent Tessman
I apologize if someone's already posted this--I haven't been able to keep up
with my newsgroup reading the last couple of weeks. But if you haven't
checked out
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/game_design/19980313/bad_designer.htm
yet, you may find it an interesting read, although most of the
shortcomings and design problems mentioned have been discussed (sometimes at
length) on r.a.i-f. A few Infocom games get mentioned, although more in the
context of "problems those old text adventures had that still exist today".
----------
Kent Tessman - The General Coffee Company Film Productions
tes...@interlog.com genera...@geocities.com
http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/academy/5976
aul...@scott.deleteme.net
In article <6er39v$802$1...@news.interlog.com>,
Kent Tessman <tes...@remove-to-reply.interlog.com> wrote:
>
>http://www.gamasutra.com/features/game_design/19980313/bad_designer.htm
>
>yet, you may find it an interesting read, although most of the
>shortcomings and design problems mentioned have been discussed (sometimes at
>length) on r.a.i-f. A few Infocom games get mentioned, although more in the
>context of "problems those old text adventures had that still exist today".
I found this an interesting article, but have to take issue with some
of the points made, particulary as they apply to old text adventures.
He actually has the gall to criticize the mazes in Colossal Cave! Come
on! The were the FIRST of their kind, challenging, fun and original
(in their day)!
Secondly he says, regarding one action affecting things far off:
"Doom was guilty of this a lot, but the worst example ever was in The
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, an Infocom text adventure. In that
game, if you didn’t pick up the junk mail at the very beginning of
the game, it was unwinnable at the very end."
This is just wrong. Besides the fact that all good adventurers of the
era carried along everyting that wasn't nailed down, and HGTTG provided
a means to carry plenty of objects, the place the mail comes in handy is
not that far along in the game. Talk to me about <rot13>purrfr
fnaqjvpurf</rot13> and then you'll have a point, and a damn good one.
Then he says that the ending of Infidel required all this trial and error
with no clue as to the order you have to perform four actions. Maybe I
got lucky, but I don't reacall having to try too many combinations, and
if memory serves, the actions are performed in a logical order with
reasonable means to figure them out.
Lastly, I think he should play So Far, based on the following:
Real Surrealism seeks to shock the mind into a new awareness of [ the
human condition... through the juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated
objects...
and
...true Surrealism is informed by an underlying theme.
I haven’t seen any surrealism in computer games that could claim such
noble goals.
It is up to the individual to judge Andrew's success in meeting "such
noble goals," but it can hardly be argued that they are missing.
Joe
--
_____
"No one in the world ever gets what they want, and that is beautiful.
Everybody dies frustrated and sad, and that is beautiful." -- TMBG
michael...@ey.com
In article <6eu351$d...@koala.scott.net>,
aul...@scott.deleteme.net wrote:
>
> I found this an interesting article, but have to take issue with some
> of the points made, particulary as they apply to old text adventures.
> He actually has the gall to criticize the mazes in Colossal Cave! Come
> on! The were the FIRST of their kind, challenging, fun and original
> (in their day)!
Just because it's the original doesn't make it good. I have said this before
and I will say it again: Colossal Cave is a rotten game by even the most
lenient standards we have for IF today, and Zork isn't much better. That's
because we have (fortunately) moved far beyond what the original implementors
were shooting for. The technology has advanced, our understanding of the
capabilities and potentials for IF has advanced -- hell, the writing skills of
your average computer programmer have probably advanced. We can admire
Colossal Cave for what it was in its time, and we can be thankful that it
generated enough interest to keep the genre alive today, but we can't say
things like "Big purposesless mazes are bad, except for the big, purposeless
mazes in Colossal Cave or Zork." That's a double standard. We have nothing
with which to back the statement up; nothing sets those mazes apart from any
other big,
purposeless, frustrating and all-around crappy maze in a newer game.
> Secondly he says, regarding one action affecting things far off:
>
> "Doom was guilty of this a lot, but the worst example ever was in The
> Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, an Infocom text adventure. In that
> game, if you didn’t pick up the junk mail at the very beginning of
> the game, it was unwinnable at the very end."
>
> This is just wrong. Besides the fact that all good adventurers of the
> era carried along everyting that wasn't nailed down, and HGTTG provided
> a means to carry plenty of objects, the place the mail comes in handy is
> not that far along in the game. Talk to me about <rot13>purrfr
> fnaqjvpurf</rot13> and then you'll have a point, and a damn good one.
Perhaps you're splitting hairs about the mail -- there really was nothing to
indicate that the mail wasn't an utterly useless bit of scenery, and if you
missed it then you did have to start over. Regardless, the fact remains that
HGTTG was still shamefacedly guilty of the "action at a distance" crime. What
about the small dog and the cheese sandwich? Or rather, more specifically, the
small dog which exhibits absolutely no clue that it's the same small dog that
swallows the G'Gugvunt spaceship much, much later in the game, and the cheese
sandwich which likewise exhibits absolutely no clue that you can or should
feed it to the dog, or that such action will prevent the aforementioned
swallowing of the spaceship? The cheese sandwich, I might add, which doesn't
even appear in the room description unless you specifically go hunting for it?
No, this guy's right on the money with HGTTG.
> Then he says that the ending of Infidel required all this trial and error
> with no clue as to the order you have to perform four actions. Maybe I
> got lucky, but I don't reacall having to try too many combinations, and
> if memory serves, the actions are performed in a logical order with
> reasonable means to figure them out.
I really don't remember, myself.
> Lastly, I think he should play So Far, based on the following:
>
> Real Surrealism seeks to shock the mind into a new awareness of [ the
> human condition... through the juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated
> objects...
I think he might have been a bit too harsh with this one. I'm not sure that
MYST "shocks the mind into a new awareness of the human condition," but it is
certainly surreal and it is inarguably a wonderful game. I think the point of
games like MYST is not to meet some English grad student's stodgy definition
of surrealism, but rather to create an aesthetically beautiful but
non-traditional environment, which will be fascinating to explore precisely
because it doesn't meet our expectations about what a landscape should or
shouldn't look like.
I will point out, however, that for this to be effective, the game must have a
certain consistency, a respect for its own internal *il*logic -- and most of
the games that have jumped on MYST's coattails don't have that. They're just
meaningless, slapdash pastiches of random images -- like a goat's head in
a bathtub, or like the author's clown in the control chamber.
> ...true Surrealism is informed by an underlying theme.
Exactly my point.
--M
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
John Miles
michael...@ey.com wrote:
>
> <snip...>
> ...and Zork isn't much better. That's
> because we have (fortunately) moved far beyond what the original > implementors
> were shooting for. The technology has advanced, our understanding of > the
> capabilities and potentials for IF has advanced -- hell, the writing > skills of
> your average computer programmer have probably advanced.
ROFL. Writing skills in ANY modern game advancing beyond those
exhibited by the Implementers?
This is an example of that "surrealism" thing, right? :-)
-- jm
------------------------------------------------------
Note: My E-mail address has been altered to avoid spam
------------------------------------------------------
Lars Duening
<michael...@ey.com> wrote:
> We can admire
> Colossal Cave for what it was in its time, and we can be thankful that it
> generated enough interest to keep the genre alive today, but we can't say
> things like "Big purposesless mazes are bad, except for the big, purposeless
> mazes in Colossal Cave or Zork." That's a double standard. We have nothing
> with which to back the statement up; nothing sets those mazes apart from any
> other big,
> purposeless, frustrating and all-around crappy maze in a newer game.
Well..., in the class of big purposeless mazes, these first two were the
best of their kind. No frills, no masquerade - just a plain honest "You
are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike". The eclipse of the
whole genre of this type of puzzle.
Big purposeless mazes had to be done once in IF, just to demonstrate why
they are a bad idea. So the mazes in Adventure and Zork are excepted
because they are _the_ examples of how to not do it.
And of course it's also a matter of "been there, done that, got the
treasure chest" for the experienced IF players :-)
(Last year I implemented Adventure in a mud, simply to have something
'historical' in the game. Adapting the puzzles to the multi-user
environment was interesting. Of course I included both mazes; but I put
up a warning sign at the entrance of the all-alike-maze, and award
extra bonus points just for reaching the vending machine. And despite
its age, the writing is still above what the average of mud programmers
tend to produce (including myself).)
--
Lars Duening; la...@cableinet.co.uk
Second April
> Just because it's the original doesn't make it good. I have said this before
> and I will say it again: Colossal Cave is a rotten game by even the most
> because we have (fortunately) moved far beyond what the original implementors
> were shooting for. The technology has advanced, our understanding of the
> capabilities and potentials for IF has advanced -- hell, the writing skills of
> Colossal Cave for what it was in its time, and we can be thankful that it
> generated enough interest to keep the genre alive today, but we can't say
> things like "Big purposesless mazes are bad, except for the big, purposeless
> mazes in Colossal Cave or Zork." That's a double standard. We have nothing
> with which to back the statement up; nothing sets those mazes apart from any
> other big,
> purposeless, frustrating and all-around crappy maze in a newer game.
I agree that the mazes are a pain--particularly so because there are a lot
more rooms than items in your inventory, if you follow me; in fact, the
"all alike" maze in CC has many more rooms than there are non-treasure
objects in the game (and treasures get picked up by the pirate), so the
only way to solve it, as far as I can tell, is by stumbling on the right
place. (It can't, in other words, be fully mapped.) But I wouldn't call
either CC or any of the Zorks "rotten"; if they came out today, we'd
probably kvetch a bit about the mazes but enjoy the good writing and the
humor and give them generally fair ratings.
Okay, that's not quite true. Some would scream with horror at the sight of
a cave-crawl/treasure-hunt and run. But that, I think, is because IF
started with that model and it's been repeated so many times; we wouldn't
be complaining about them today if CC and Zork hadn't been the prototypes
and inspired so much imitation. If Infocom had started out with Starcross
and it had become the most-played game in IF history, we'd all be
complaining about sci-fi puzzle-fests, not dungeon treasure hunts.
I take your basic point--we'd certainly laugh ourselves sick at any game
where "get bear" was a required action--but I think you overstate.
(Particularly about the writing skill; much of Zork I is a bit
underwritten, but CC and Zorks II and III are models of good, concise
writing that sets a mood well.)
> missed it then you did have to start over. Regardless, the fact remains that
> HGTTG was still shamefacedly guilty of the "action at a distance" crime. What
> about the small dog and the cheese sandwich? Or rather, more specifically, the
> small dog which exhibits absolutely no clue that it's the same small dog that
> swallows the G'Gugvunt spaceship much, much later in the game, and the cheese
> sandwich which likewise exhibits absolutely no clue that you can or should
> feed it to the dog, or that such action will prevent the aforementioned
> swallowing of the spaceship? The cheese sandwich, I might add, which doesn't
> even appear in the room description unless you specifically go hunting for it?
> No, this guy's right on the money with HGTTG.
Well, under the logic of the game, when you see a small dog, something
really should click. And bear in mind that you don't have to go all the
way back to the start to do the cheese sandwich bit--when playing as Ford,
you can get Arthur to do what's required. But I agree that HGTTG had
problems, particularly the stupid tools (a _toothbrush_?) that you have to
pick up here and there.
> > Then he says that the ending of Infidel required all this trial and error
> > with no clue as to the order you have to perform four actions. Maybe I
> > got lucky, but I don't reacall having to try too many combinations, and
> > if memory serves, the actions are performed in a logical order with
> > reasonable means to figure them out.
If you decipher the hieroglyphs in the various gods' chambers, they'll
tell you the proper order. A little cruel, but not excessive.
Duncan Stevens
d-st...@nwu.edu
312-654-0280
The room is as you left it; your last touch--
A thoughtless pressure, knowing not itself
As saintly--hallows now each simple thing,
Hallows and glorifies, and glows between
The dust's gray fingers, like a shielded light.
--from "Interim," by Edna St. Vincent Millay
Joe Mason
In article <6eu351$d...@koala.scott.net>, <aul...@scott.deleteme.net> wrote:
>
>Lastly, I think he should play So Far, based on the following:
>
>Real Surrealism seeks to shock the mind into a new awareness of [ the
>human condition... through the juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated
>objects...
>
>
>...true Surrealism is informed by an underlying theme.
>
>noble goals.
I agree. He should play So Far. And Losing Your Grip. So who wants to tell
him?
(I also think somebody should send Robert Pinsky a copy of The Space Under the
Window and ask his opinion on it as a piece of "interactive poetry". Anybody
agree?)
Joe
HarryH
In article <6eulmp$6fp$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, michael...@ey.com says...
>Just because it's the original doesn't make it good. I have said this before
>and I will say it again: Colossal Cave is a rotten game by even the most
>lenient standards we have for IF today, and Zork isn't much better. That's
>because we have (fortunately) moved far beyond what the original
>implementors
Ahhh, the benefit of hindsight. Isn't it wonderful?
Now that you mention it, Space Invaders is a lousy game. Only left, right,
stop and shoot. So is Pacman. Tetris? Yawn. Even the original Mortal Kombat
seems so jaded these days. Quake? Its faulty radiosity renderer technique
won't hold a candle to what's coming.
One of these days, Jigsaw will (if not already) be terrible, too, you know.
My point is: don't critize things that can't be helped. It's pointless! ;)
-------------------------------------------------------
Of course I'll work on weekends without pay!
- successful applicant
Allen Garvin
HarryH <har...@iu.net.idiotic.com.skip.idiotic.com> wrote:
michael...@ey.com says...
Just because it's the original doesn't make it good. I have said
this before and I will say it again: Colossal Cave is a rotten
game by even the most lenient standards we have for IF today,
and Zork isn't much better. That's because we have (fortunately)
moved far beyond what the original implementors
Ahhh, the benefit of hindsight. Isn't it wonderful?
Now that you mention it, Space Invaders is a lousy game. Only left,
right, stop and shoot. So is Pacman. Tetris? Yawn. Even the original
Mortal Kombat seems so jaded these days. Quake? Its faulty radiosity
renderer technique won't hold a candle to what's coming.
One of these days, Jigsaw will (if not already) be terrible, too,
you know.
My point is: don't critize things that can't be helped. It's
pointless! ;)
Just like those horrible antiquated Greek plays... just 2 or 3 people on the
stage at one time. How out of date they are with theatrical technology,
with modern stages well-built enough today to support dozens of actors.
(ok, maybe you mean the parser will be someday out of date, but I couldn't
resist this little poke)
--
Allen Garvin kisses are a better fate
--------------------------------------------- than wisdom
eare...@faeryland.tamu-commerce.edu
http://faeryland.tamu-commerce.edu/~earendil e e cummings
michael...@ey.com
In article <35169...@news.tamu-commerce.edu>,
eare...@faeryland.TAMU-Commerce.edu wrote:
>
> HarryH <har...@iu.net.idiotic.com.skip.idiotic.com> wrote:
>
> michael...@ey.com says...
> Just because it's the original doesn't make it good. I have said
> this before and I will say it again: Colossal Cave is a rotten
> game by even the most lenient standards we have for IF today,
> and Zork isn't much better. That's because we have (fortunately)
> moved far beyond what the original implementors
>
> Ahhh, the benefit of hindsight. Isn't it wonderful?
>
> Now that you mention it, Space Invaders is a lousy game. Only left,
> right, stop and shoot. So is Pacman. Tetris? Yawn. Even the original
> Mortal Kombat seems so jaded these days. Quake? Its faulty radiosity
> renderer technique won't hold a candle to what's coming.
>
> One of these days, Jigsaw will (if not already) be terrible, too,
> you know.
>
> My point is: don't critize things that can't be helped. It's
> pointless! ;)
>
> Just like those horrible antiquated Greek plays... just 2 or 3 people on the
> stage at one time. How out of date they are with theatrical technology,
> with modern stages well-built enough today to support dozens of actors.
MY point is: don't canonize something just because of its antiquity. We
consider the Greek plays classics because their content, not because of the
way the Greeks built stages back in the 'good old days'. A lousy maze is still
a lousy maze, no matter how old it is.
--M.
Phil Goetz
In article <6eulmp$6fp$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <michael...@ey.com> wrote:
>In article <6eu351$d...@koala.scott.net>,
> aul...@scott.deleteme.net wrote:
>>
>> of the points made, particulary as they apply to old text adventures.
>> He actually has the gall to criticize the mazes in Colossal Cave! Come
>> on! The were the FIRST of their kind, challenging, fun and original
>> (in their day)!
>
>Colossal Cave for what it was in its time, and we can be thankful that it
>generated enough interest to keep the genre alive today, but we can't say
>things like "Big purposesless mazes are bad, except for the big, purposeless
>mazes in Colossal Cave or Zork." That's a double standard. We have nothing
>with which to back the statement up; nothing sets those mazes apart from any
>other big,
>purposeless, frustrating and all-around crappy maze in a newer game.
What sets them apart is that solving a maze by dropping items in it was
a puzzle to be solved. Zork's maze had an additional puzzle, tho not a
very good one, in that the thief would move items around in the maze.
Continuing to use silmiar mazes is just like re-using puzzles from
another game. But it was a puzzle the first time.
>I think he might have been a bit too harsh with this one. I'm not sure that
>MYST "shocks the mind into a new awareness of the human condition," but it is
>certainly surreal and it is inarguably a wonderful game.
I could argue with that...
Phil Go...@zoesis.com
organizer, 1998 "People Who Didn't Especially Care for Myst" convention
Francis Irving
On 23 Mar 1998 23:04:03 GMT, go...@cs.buffalo.edu (Phil Goetz) wrote:
>What sets them apart is that solving a maze by dropping items in it was
>a puzzle to be solved. Zork's maze had an additional puzzle, tho not a
>very good one, in that the thief would move items around in the maze.
>Continuing to use silmiar mazes is just like re-using puzzles from
>another game. But it was a puzzle the first time.
And a very fine puzzle, too. I remember being _really_ pleased when I
first worked it out*, when I was about six. It was a sense of power -
you could change dull uniformity into your own landscape, just by
dropping things. All the rooms on the map ended up with excellent
names like "cheese".
In this sense it was a simple fore-shadowing of being able to name
items and dogs in more modern adventure games, or of the player being
able to build her own worlds in MUDs.
Francis.
Home: fra...@pobox.co.uk Web: www.meta.demon.co.uk
* Actually not in Zork but in Ian Livingstone's (?) game Eureka for
the Spectrum, the one with the £25,000 prize
Trevor Barrie
>We can admire Colossal Cave for what it was in its time, and we can be
>thankful that it generated enough interest to keep the genre alive today, but
>we can't say things like "Big purposesless mazes are bad, except for the big,
>purposeless mazes in Colossal Cave or Zork."
Why on Earth can't we say that? The maze (big, purposeless, or otherwise) is
not an inherently bad puzzle. The bad part is using a puzzle that's been used
X,000 times already, that we all already know how to solve, and that
consequently just pads out the game. Colossal Cave didn't do that.
Giles Boutel
Phil Goetz <go...@cs.buffalo.edu> wrote in article
<6f6pp3$lit$1...@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu>...
> In article <6eulmp$6fp$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <michael...@ey.com>
wrote:
>
> >I think he might have been a bit too harsh with this one. I'm not sure
that
> >MYST "shocks the mind into a new awareness of the human condition," but
it is
> >certainly surreal and it is inarguably a wonderful game.
>
> I could argue with that...
Likewise (doesn't that sound more literate than me too :-). It bored me
mystless.
>
> Phil Go...@zoesis.com
> organizer, 1998 "People Who Didn't Especially Care for Myst" convention
Sign me up, Phil!
-Giles
HarryH
In article <352586bf....@news.demon.co.uk>, fra...@ncgraphics.co.uk
says...
>On 23 Mar 1998 23:04:03 GMT, go...@cs.buffalo.edu (Phil Goetz) wrote:
>>Continuing to use silmiar mazes is just like re-using puzzles from
>>another game. But it was a puzzle the first time.
>And a very fine puzzle, too. I remember being _really_ pleased when I
>first worked it out*, when I was about six. It was a sense of power -
I, too, enjoy the mazes.
Somehow the phrase "Twisty passages all alike" sticks to my brain like glue.
Most of the puzzles are hard. I never did solve them all, but those that I
solve give me tremendous satisfaction. I wouldn't change a thing (well, maybe
a better parser).