I was thinking that a really nice project would be taking Infocom text games and bringing them to life with the AGS system... Imagine replaying Zork I, but this time will brilliant graphics, sound, and perhaps even a speechpack. If that did well, I could see a graphical adventure game of other Infocom games... A Mind Forever Voyaging? Zork II? Spellcraft? Starcross? Leather Goddesses of Phobos! So many juicy text games that deserve graphics :)
Are Infocom games still under a copywrite? Because I'm very interested (if others are as well) in forming a group dedicated to bringing the old Infocom games into a new era :)
They are still copyrighted and protected by Infocom, Inc. a subsidary of Activision.
Quote from: Elliott Hird on Sat 11/02/2006 18:25:13
They are still copyrighted and protected by Infocom, Inc. a subsidary of Activision.
Damn. Well, I suppose that's that, eh? It's too bad, they're just letting those games rot away *sigh*
They're very easy to get illegally though. Nobody seems to care anymore. I say go for it, but shut down at the first cough from Activision's lawyers. I'd help.
Well, Rex, it's interesting that you should take an interest on it. I've had a couple of thoughts about it myself. Contact me via PM or MSN (my address is on my profile) - I'd like to discuss it further.
And about copyright, I second Elliot - go right on ahead, and keep working until you get a cease-and-desist letter. It's not likely to come, not with games these old. I'm not sure they even sell them.
Well, a team of 3 already. See my profile for info, or: MSN: sargetron@hotmail.com, AIM: sargetron, Email: elliotthird@tiscali.co.uk
Quote from: Sanguinous Rex on Sat 11/02/2006 18:24:01So many juicy text games that deserve graphics :)
No game
deserves graphics. There's absolutely nothing wrong with text-only games! In some ways they are superior to graphical games.
Having said that, if you want to do something with the old Infocom games, I think you should talk to Activision. There exists some fangames that are written with permission. (See for example Mr Bill's Adventureland (http://www.mrbillsadventureland.com/links/zork/zorkhist/zorkhist.htm) for a list.) And in that case, I think also you should do it in the style of Zork GI.
Or Return to Zork, if it's a Zork game. Return to Zork had a remarkable interface. It was very close to IF, except it was point and click. Possibly the closest, even in feel, to the parser games.
Anyway, why should any game be made in the style of an already made game? Surely, whichever style suits the game would be best.
I meant first person with pretty, realistic graphics - like all the graphical Zorks. Doing Zork as a LA/Sierra-style adventure would feel wrong, IMHO. (Be unsuitable for the games, if you wish.)
Ah, hah. :) Yes, I think so too.
This looks positive!
Quote from: Trumgottist on Sat 11/02/2006 19:13:08
I meant first person with pretty, realistic graphics - like all the graphical Zorks. Doing Zork as a LA/Sierra-style adventure would feel wrong, IMHO. (Be unsuitable for the games, if you wish.)
I don't know, I think I disagree with you on this one. Sure, Infocom games presented YOU in a 1st person perspective, but when re-creating a genre, you don't have to do it rote-for-rote. I believe a 3rd person adventure game viewpoint would be re-invigorating, especially if the graphics were really detailed and poured out from the monitor in brilliant colors.
I sent Rui and Elliot PM's, so you guys can reply when you get them.
That's a good point. This seems pointing towards a Zork fangame... mmh... hmm...
That's funny. I just played Starcross and Enchanter again the other day, and I was thinking that it would be fun to reinterpret them as graphical games. I played those games for the first time way back when I was just a wee little tot. They were way too hard for me then, but now I can appreciate them a lot better.
I think graphical remakes are a great idea.
Zork wouldn't need a speechpack, as I don't think anyone (the troll, or the robber? I don't remember) spoke. THe question becomes, however, that if you make a LGoP remake, will it come with shit-smelling scratch and sniff cards?
EDIT: Grunt. I would offer my services, but the only thing I could really give to the project would be writing, and all the writing already exists.
Well, esper, it wouldn't be a 1:1 remake, simply because that just "wouldn't work" graphically. Also, some of the stupid puzzles would have to be replaced, I'd think.
Wellllll, if the project ever takes off, I'll be glad to help. I loved the old Infocom games, as they were the first games I ever played, EVER. Part of my writing style comes from their inspiration, I would think.
Why does everyone want to remake Zork? ::)
True, the original text games were great games, but I wouldn't call them interesting. They were a ton of fun from a puzzle-solving standpoint, but as a fascinating world to explore it certainly wasn't. The few NPCs that populated the games were cardboard cutouts, and the plot wasn't any deeper than "find all the treasures".
There are other Infocom games much more worthy of a remake. Unless you plan on revamping the details and adding many more story elements ala KQ2+, let Zork 1-3 rest in peace the way they are.
-D
Leave LGoP alone, I'd say... there are way too many word-based jokes, I don't think it'd work. Plus, well, that game really is better left with the imagination ^_-
Yeah, how does one do a graphical representation of:
Quote"You insert the cotton balls into the "T" remover..."
Good old "T" remover!Ã, My personal favorite was using it on the rabbit. :-D
Some of the old text games would be impossible to convey graphically.Ã, "Nord and Bert", with its beautiful pun puzzles, would be near impossible.Ã, Likewise LGOP and it's "T" remover.
Some things should be left well-enough alone.Ã, Activision was planning a graphical "Planetfall" at some point, and their priliminary screenshots of Floyd the Robot were a tremendous let-down.Ã, It's not that the pictures were BAD, just the opposite, but nothing could ever compare with what I had in my head.Ã, The same thing happened with Y'Gael in "Grand Inquisitor".Ã, In "Wishbringer" and "Beyond Zork", she was a wise, grey-haired old woman.Ã, Somehow, in Z:GI, she mysteriously turned into a young, ditzy valley girl.Ã, This is a very small wrinkle in an otherwise fine game, but I couldn't help think "Huh?"
I used to think a graphical "A Mind Forever Voyaging" was impossible, but now it might just be.Ã, GTA and its ilk have proven that detailed city-scapes are possible for games, but I doubt it would be able to make the same political impact as the original.Ã,Â
Yeesh.Ã, I played these games almost 20 years ago.Ã, I'm such a nostalgia buff.
Well, surely, if things are done well... Dave, since you're also a reader of the Dark Tower series, I'll give you an example. I read the first four Dark Tower books with few illustrations - and what little there were were "sketch-style" - pencil lines, non-coloured, and they showed just a concept of the character. I made the journey into the Calla Bryn Sturgis with my own images of the ka-tet - Roland, Eddie, Susannah, Jake, and especially Oy (who I knew was *not* like what I imagined, but I liked the picture I had of him). And even such characters as Walter O'Dim, and especially Jonas DePape and Rhea of the Cöos. Not to mention the Tick-Tock man.
Anyway. I rode into Calla Bryn Sturgis with my own images of the characters. I saw the illustrations that accompanied the book. They were nice, yes, but I didn't pay them much attention. That wasn't Roland, and that wasn't Susannah, and so on. They were nice concepts, but not *my* concepts. And this is as it should be.
But when I bought DK7, I was flabberghasted. The illustrations are perfect. I was more than willing to surrender my own images - *those* were Jake and Oy, *that* was Pere Callahan. And *that* was Roland.
What do I mean by this? Sure, there's a difference between illustrating a novel and completely making it a graphic story. But it's not impossible. The important thing is to keep a close eye on the original, and try to capture what it gave off.
As for your question "why does everyone want to remake Zork"... surely there's a lot of potential in the game, were one to try and add an actual story to it. :) Nothing much, but certain story arcs. It is most certainly possible, as you'll remember by the intro I showed you a long time ago (Cindy the fairy).
Quote from: Rui "Brisby" Pires (an Hallucination) on Wed 15/02/2006 13:26:22
Well, surely, if things are done well... Dave, since you're also a reader of the Dark Tower series, I'll give you an example. I read the first four Dark Tower books with few illustrations - and what little there were were "sketch-style" - pencil lines, non-coloured, and they showed just a concept of the character. I made the journey into the Calla Bryn Sturgis with my own images of the ka-tet - Roland, Eddie, Susannah, Jake, and especially Oy (who I knew was *not* like what I imagined, but I liked the picture I had of him). And even such characters as Walter O'Dim, and especially Jonas DePape and Rhea of the Cöos. Not to mention the Tick-Tock man.
Anyway. I rode into Calla Bryn Sturgis with my own images of the characters. I saw the illustrations that accompanied the book. They were nice, yes, but I didn't pay them much attention. That wasn't Roland, and that wasn't Susannah, and so on. They were nice concepts, but not *my* concepts. And this is as it should be.
But when I bought DK7, I was flabberghasted. The illustrations are perfect. I was more than willing to surrender my own images - *those* were Jake and Oy, *that* was Pere Callahan. And *that* was Roland.
What do I mean by this? Sure, there's a difference between illustrating a novel and completely making it a graphic story. But it's not impossible. The important thing is to keep a close eye on the original, and try to capture what it gave off.
As for your question "why does everyone want to remake Zork"... surely there's a lot of potential in the game, were one to try and add an actual story to it. :) Nothing much, but certain story arcs. It is most certainly possible, as you'll remember by the intro I showed you a long time ago (Cindy the fairy).
I agree with Brisby. Now, this is a general answer to some other people:
You have to also realize that people want to cling to the past, heck I'm not saying this to bash anyone, God knows how often I look back and miss some things. But this whole "Text games should stay text games" argument needs to be shelved right next to "Super Nintendo > All, RPG games all suck today!" argument that often pops up in certain circles.
I feel strongly that you can give a graphics to anything, I mean, oh no, some things will look different then what you envisioned in your head when you played them, but its just like anything someone reads a book, then watches the movie or reads the comic adaptation!
Why Zork? Because other then "Adventure" (and you guys should be thankful we're not going to redo that one LOL), Zork is considered by many to be the "Granddaddy" of text games. I do believe that Zork can be re-made and that it will become a compelling and awesome adventure game. Someone was correct though - you can't just make it a 'carbon copy' of the text Zork. It needs to be a bit more dynamic, a bit more "alive" - and these considerations have been taken into, uh, consideration :P
***
Oh, and I'd LOVE to take up the challenge (one day) of bringing Leather Goddesses of Phobos into an 3d adventure game medium :P I don't remember too much about that game, but I do recall being stuck in that damn mad scientist's lab in the body of a monkey!
lol
Quote from: Sanguinous Rex on Wed 15/02/2006 22:23:53You have to also realize that people want to cling to the past, heck I'm not saying this to bash anyone, God knows how often I look back and miss some things. But this whole "Text games should stay text games" argument needs to be shelved right next to "Super Nintendo > All, RPG games all suck today!" argument that often pops up in certain circles.
I don't think anyone has said that text games have to stay text games, period. What has been said is that
some text games wouldn't work well as graphic adventures. Which is an entirely different argument.
Quotebut its just like anything someone reads a book, then watches the movie or reads the comic adaptation!
Not all books have movies or comic adaptations. Nor should they. Not everything in writing converts well to visuals. I doubt there'll ever be a movie or comic version of
Finnegan's Wake--and if there is, it'll certainly be completely different from reading the book!
(Egad...okay, just to make sure, I checked imdb.org (http://www.imdb.com/) to see just in case there
had ever been a Finnegan's Wake movie made...and it turns out there was (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059179/)! Well, I suppose it's inevitable that given
any well-known book
someone's going to try to make a movie out of it; I'm still not convinced that's necessarily a good idea...)
That being said, I'm not saying a good graphic adventure couldn't be made out of Zork. But it would have to be changed a lot, and that change goes well beyond making it "more dynamic". One problem is that plot tends to be considered an important graphic adventures nowadays, and Zork, as others have said, well, doesn't have one. Of course, as Rui said, you can
add a plot...but that's sort of the point; to make it into a good graphic adventure you'd have to change a lot. It wouldn't be a graphical version of Zork as much as it would be a graphic adventure
based (probably rather loosely) on Zork, which isn't the same thing.
Still, nothing's stopping you from doing it, if you want to. I personally don't think every text adventure would be improved by being made into a graphic adventure, any more than I think every book would be improved by making it into a movie. Some things work better in writing. Still, if you really want to make a graphic adventure based on Zork, I wish you success. I'm not trying to tell you not to do it; I'm just trying to explain where I think some of the other posters in this thread are coming from.
the question that begs asking is how do you do the gui? One of the beuties (and frustraition) of these games is the amount of things you can do. things that maybe useless, usefull, or deadly are often in the same room. as well you can often have inbetween rooms that hav no purpose but expand the feeling of depth.as well a few keystrokes can describe somthing that can take weeks ( at least) to paint. This is a noble idea. but its going to take hella long.
You just described something that is part of the actual process of converting the whole thing into text. It's nothing I haven't had thoughts about, in the past, when I dreamed of making "Babel" a graphic adventure.
I dunno, I think as long as people know the risks and caveats - and this seems to be the case - it's more than well worth the good ol' college try.
Well I love a noble quest to do something impossible, Count me in!
I would be best at charactor sprites, and design. If I can get a hand on a microphone, I'll do voice acting.
May the project commence!