Adventure Game Studio

I found a new amateur text adventure! Here's the download link:
http://www.zaksite.co.uk/fanart_files/ZAK0.zip

It's made as if it werea prequel to the famous LucasArt's ''Zak McKracken and the Alien Mindbenders'' game.

You can save and restore just typing ''Save'' and ''Restore''

Okay. Can I assume that you wrote this? Sorry to say, but it's rather lacking in quality. The first thing I noticed was a lot of errors in spelling and grammar, on the first screen. The second thing I noticed was that the game didn't respond in any way to the first group of commands that came to mind (e.g. take fishbowl, look under bed, talk to sushi, pick up phone). With a first impression like that, I'm not going to play on.

Besides, there is PLENTY of home brewed interactive fiction out there, quite a bit of it higher quality then this, though the IDEA (a I.F. version of an old GRAPHIC game) sounds interesting.

You can type ''Get Sushi'', ''use phone'', ''use bed'' and open desk.

Quote from: advent on Fri 09/06/2006 17:53:06
You can type ''Get Sushi'', ''use phone'', ''use bed'' and open desk.

"Use" is not a verb most people enjoy using in IFs. It should be "Lay in bed" and "dial phone" for example.

Quote from: Exorph on Sat 10/06/2006 17:40:30
"Use" is not a verb most people enjoy using in IFs. It should be "Lay in bed" and "dial phone" for example.

I realise that's the convention, but there's a case to be made for accepting "use" when the intent is obvious - when something has one clear use. For example, "use bed" is almost certainly "lie on bed" and should probably be accepted as one way of lying on the bed, whereas "use phone" is a bit hazy and should probably elicit "You'll have to be more specific."
There are more obvious examples where "use" could work:
use sun tan lotion (rather than e.g. "apply sun tan lotion to me")
use light switch (rather than the clumsy "throw light switch" "switch light switch" etc)
use ladder
use key in lock
Clearly these should be provided as alternatives, not the only way to get things done, but if the intent is obvious, why ignore the input?

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sat 10/06/2006 19:32:53
I realise that's the convention, but there's a case to be made for accepting "use" when the intent is obvious - when something has one clear use. For example, "use bed" is almost certainly "lie on bed" and should probably be accepted as one way of lying on the bed,

I disagree. In the IF genre, suspension-of-disbelief is increased by using actual English phrasing, rather than the lazy 'use' verb. Indeed, any IF game with a halfway decent parser will balk at "look window" and "use door" (but not at "drop all keys except the black one" or "greet Phil and give the apple to him")

I don't see how typing correct English sentences into the parser helps suspend disbelief much... the great thing about the parser is that it's so flexible. You can type complex sentences that work nicely the way you intended if you really want to, but you can also simplify and the game will understand what you mean.

You don't type "Please computer, I would like walk through the doorway to the north". You don't even type "go north". You type "n".

So I agree with SteveMcCrea, if the intent is blatantly obvious, why not allow the verb 'use'?
Though I must say, I can't think of any situation where I have used the verb 'use' in an IF. I probably have though, since I tend to choose the words that require the least typing. 'Get' instead of 'take', 'turn off' instead of 'extinguish', and of course the various abbreviations commonly found in IF games.

Quote from: Ghormak on Sat 10/06/2006 22:52:03
Though I must say, I can't think of any situation where I have used the verb 'use' in an IF.

Exactly. "Use" is rarely if ever blatantly obvious. There is (obviously) a difference between allowing abbrev for common words or phrases such as "examine", and allowing a catch-all word to do most anything even if it really doesn't mean that in English. If you allow "use" in an IF, people will start "use"ing everything to see what the intent of an object is. And that breaks SoD.

Nobody "uses" a button, book, television or rope in daily life. You push/read/turn on/tie/climb them.

Nonsense. People "use" things all the time. See my examples.

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sun 11/06/2006 00:11:14
Nonsense. People "use" things all the time. See my examples.

Nonsense. If you would speak those phrases IRL, people would be confused by them.

This "adventure" was made using Text World.
IF is something else.

http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=26769.0

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sun 11/06/2006 00:11:14
Nonsense. People "use" things all the time. See my examples.

Aww, I'm so tired.. I'm gonna use the light switch and then use my bed.
For some reason that doesn't sound right at all. ;)

I have to say it's a good thing not to use the use verb.
Yeah, it might be obvious what it means from time to time, but I see no reason why the obvious should somehow be an exception. Sleeping might be the obvious use for a bed, but there are still so many other things it could be used for, so why should you let the IF select sleeping for you if you type in the word USE, when it's always the player who selects the verb otherwise?

Steve's right, you guys. If in real life I were to say "remember to use sun tan lotion when you go out in the sun," people wouldn't think anything of it. But that's not important. Steve's point is that if the player's intention is obvious, as is the case in all of Steve's examples, then the game shouldn't complain that you weren't specific enough. If the solution to the puzzle is to squirt sun tan lotion in someone's eyes, then "use" wouldn't be sufficient. But otherwise, it's as clear as day what the player means, and a parser that rejected "use" would appear underdeveloped.

Quote from: Erenan on Sun 11/06/2006 05:40:12
and a parser that rejected "use" would appear underdeveloped.

Wooo. So what you're saying is that famous IF games such as Zork, A Mind Forever Voyaging and Slouching Towards Bedlam, generally considered the cream of the crop among fans, appear underdeveloped? I think someone needs to use a cluebat on you.

Let's agree to disagree on this one. :=

ADRIFT is better to make text adventures, I'm making two projects with ADRIFT:
1. A HUGE medieval fantastic game with RPG battles.

2. A textbased remake of Monkey Island 1.

Quote from: Radiant on Sun 11/06/2006 10:34:59
Wooo. So what you're saying is that famous IF games such as Zork, A Mind Forever Voyaging and Slouching Towards Bedlam, generally considered the cream of the crop among fans, appear underdeveloped?

Wait... Did I say that? I can't find where I said that.

What I'm saying is that forcing the player to guess another verb to get the game to understand what he wants to do when it's already perfectly clear is poor parser development. The only reasons I can think of for that are that the programmer was lazy or that the programmer was cruel and heartless (and lazy).

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sun 11/06/2006 14:47:14
Let's agree to disagree on this one. :=

I don't agree to that! :P

Well, okay.

QuoteNonsense. People "use" things all the time. See my examples.

Nonsense. If you would speak those phrases IRL, people would be confused by them.

Wait, are you actually saying you've never used a phone before, Radiant?  Never used a bicycle pump on a flat tire?  You actually haven't used anything?  ::)

Quoteuse sun tan lotion (rather than e.g. "apply sun tan lotion to me")

whereas I agree with leaving use in there for that for example, and generally not carpet-blocking 'use' for an IF engine, I can think of a lot of obfuscated uses for sun tan lotion in an adventure game, so that goes for something as far as 'obvious' uses goes. Obvious in real life sure, but adventure games are not real life. The game design has to gentle suggest the themes of the game and the appropriate commands to be used. In real life I don't 'examine bed' either, nor do I go 'north' but it's an IF convention for a reason.  It encourages and reenforces some things (inventive and specific usages of things) and it discourages some others (pointless-clickery-type USE MY MOM ON DOOR LOL). Exceptions exist where an application of something can IFingly be covered by the generic USE, but exceptions don't make a strong case.

whereas I use with using use in there for that for example, and generally not carpet-using 'use' for an IF engine, I can use of a lot of obfuscated uses for sun tan lotion in an adventure game, so that uses for something as far as 'obvious' uses goes. Obvious in real life sure, but adventure games are not real life. The game design has to gentle use the themes of the game and the appropriate commands to be used. In real life I don't 'use bed' either, nor do I use 'north' but it's an IF convention for a reason.  It uses and uses some things (inventive and specific usages of things) and it uses some others (pointless-clickery-type USE MY MOM ON DOOR LOL). Exceptions use where an application of something can IFingly be use by the generic USE, but exceptions don't use a strong case. YUS.

HELM USE LESS QUEST 1.0!!!11


"Use find use'self in an 18" x 25" r00m.  SEXY SPACE BABES stand in a c0rner next t0 the PYRODRIVE 9000 X-Ray Machine.

LOOK SEXY SPACE BABES

"OmG H3LM, THEY'RE HAWT!"

TOUCH SEXY SPACE BABES

" 'USE NAWTY!@!1LOL!"

USE SEXY SPACE BABES

"J00 did NOT just USE that V3RB!"

USE PYRODRIVE 9000 ON SEXY SPACE BABES

"OMG 'USE HAX0R!  J00 USE the PYRODRIVE 9000 ON the SEXY SPACE BABES, revealing their innermost...Innards...H3y, they're all guyz!  'USE TEH ROFLEND!"

Quote from: Erenan on Mon 12/06/2006 02:27:45

Quote from: Radiant on Sun 11/06/2006 10:34:59
Wooo. So what you're saying is that famous IF games such as Zork, A Mind Forever Voyaging and Slouching Towards Bedlam, generally considered the cream of the crop among fans, appear underdeveloped?

Wait... Did I say that? I can't find where I said that.

Quote from: Erenan on Sun 11/06/2006 05:40:12
a parser that rejected "use" would appear underdeveloped.

Zork, AMFV and Bedlam all reject "use". So does S101, and iirc nearly every other game by Infocom or Legend. FYI.


Anyway,

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sun 11/06/2006 14:47:14
Let's agree to disagree on this one. :=

:)

Quote from: ProgZmax on Mon 12/06/2006 03:54:31
Wait, are you actually saying you've never used a phone before, Radiant?  Never used a bicycle pump on a flat tire?  You actually haven't used anything?  ::)

Nope. I'm not using a keyboard to type this, either.

Oh and yes I agreee with Helm.

Quote from: Helm on Mon 12/06/2006 07:44:01

Quoteuse sun tan lotion (rather than e.g. "apply sun tan lotion to me")

whereas I use with using use in there for that for example, and generally not carpet-using 'use' for an IF engine, I can use of a lot of obfuscated uses for sun tan lotion in an adventure game, so that uses for something as far as 'obvious' uses goes. Obvious in real life sure, but adventure games are not real life. The game design has to gentle use the themes of the game and the appropriate commands to be used. In real life I don't 'use bed' either, nor do I use 'north' but it's an IF convention for a reason.Ã,  It uses and uses some things (inventive and specific usages of things) and it uses some others (pointless-clickery-type USE MY MOM ON DOOR LOL). Exceptions use where an application of something can IFingly be use by the generic USE, but exceptions don't use a strong case. YUS.

I feel used.

I do agree though. I felt some of the classic IFs should have allowed me to 'use key on door', but I wouldn't want the flexibility of a text parser to be stripped away by disallowing exciting verbs like and examine, exhume and crunch.

Quote from: Radiant on Mon 12/06/2006 08:09:48
Zork, AMFV and Bedlam all reject "use". So does S101, and iirc nearly every other game by Infocom or Legend. FYI.

You're missing the point, Radiant. I'm not saying that those games are bad. I'm just saying that "use" should be acceptable if it's clear what the player wants to do. The parser should be the player's means of interacting with the game world, not another obstacle in that game world.

Quote from: Erenan on Mon 12/06/2006 20:09:05
You're missing the point, Radiant. I'm not saying that those games are bad. I'm just saying that "use" should be acceptable if it's clear what the player wants to do. The parser should be the player's means of interacting with the game world, not another obstacle in that game world.

My point is that the most widely used and highly praised parsers in the world fail this criterium you're proposing. The dichotomy should be obvious.

The beauty of IF lies in the fact that it is never obvious what you can do with an item.

I think "use" can have a place, but only for the "default" uses,(such as use phone, use shower,)and almost never for solving a puzzle. as well more complex synonyms should be included ,as in "use phone" should be equivalent to "answer phone" , but "use phone" should not be equivalent to more complex things, "use phone" shouldn’t mean "dial 555-1493"
just because Infocom's parser is so great, that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement, especially in games for beginners,
btw, has anyone used the AGS parser engine to good effect?

If you include "use" in your parser, be sure to include these commands as well:

- live
- be happy
- solve puzzle

And, last but not least:
- win game

It's only consequential.

Use doesn't have to be that simple, it can add to the interactivity, or it can detract from it. if its the only word used, (OR NEARLY) yes it can be a bugaboo, but if its only part, and not used for puzzles, it can make the game world a less frustrating place. A verb that can be used on practically anything, (but never anyone) so that if you are extremely frustrated, and you want to see some new text, besides the ones you’ve seen over and over again, just USE something, I find a computer telling me use is a naughty word is a greater destroyer of my suspension of disbelief, then using something, maybe it will turn a light on, maybe it will turn on the radio, maybe it will get you killed, but at least does something. its good for those stressful moments when you want to kill the parser. Like when YOU ARE A TOTLE NEWBIE!

Quote from: Goldmund on Mon 12/06/2006 22:01:38
The beauty of IF lies in the fact that it is never obvious what you can do with an item.

That's true.
However, for some objects there's an obvious use. Think of it like the right click in the LucasArts games. It never solves a puzzle for you. It just does the basic obvious interaction.

[EDIT] I should clarify that. I don't think "use" should be as pervasive as right click. Only when it makes sense, as previously explained.

Quote from: Radiant on Mon 12/06/2006 21:33:59
My point is that the most widely used and highly praised parsers in the world fail this criterium you're proposing. The dichotomy should be obvious.

They're not perfect. Just because they're the most widely used and highly praised parsers in the world doesn't mean they can't be improved. What? Is saying that a sin or something?

But if you use the word USE only when you're certain what verb you actually mean, then why can't you just type in that verb instead?

You could type either verb, of course. The point is that if the parser understands what you want to do, it shouldn't punish the player just because he used a FORBIDDEN VERB!!! :o

Here's a quote from Inform's Designer's Manual:

Quote[attribute]Ã,  Ã, Matches any object in scope which has the given attribute. This is useful for sorting out actions according to context, and perhaps the ultimate example might be an old-fashioned “use” verb:

Verb 'use' 'employ' 'utilise'
Ã,  Ã,  * edibleÃ,  Ã,  -> Eat
Ã,  Ã,  * clothingÃ,  -> Wear
Ã,  Ã,  ...
Ã,  Ã,  * enterable -> Enter;

I think that ultimately it's the designer's decision how to include "use", if at all.
Surely we all agree that guess-the-verb situations are evil, but including "use" is pretty much the opposite.

IMO, a decent parser should allow "use deodorant", but reject "use iron rod".
People use deodorant all the time, but nobody uses an iron rod, instead people hit things with it, jam it in sliding doors, stick it in small holes or pry open coffins with its flat end.
"Use key in door" is inappropriate, too, the player should have to "unlock door with key".

An IF game is supposed to be an interactive novel, not a left/right click game ported to text only.

Quote from: Erenan on Mon 12/06/2006 23:58:30
They're not perfect. Just because they're the most widely used and highly praised parsers in the world doesn't mean they can't be improved. What? Is saying that a sin or something?

No, the point is that most fans of the IF genre disagree with you that this would be an improvement, or this simple change would have been made long ago.

Many IF games, including most infocommies and legend games, even reject "look tree" because you didn't specify if you wanted to look AT, UNDER or IN the tree. And most people don't mind.

Quote
it shouldn't punish the player just because he used a FORBIDDEN VERB!!!


> Use key in lock
Your character has performed an illegal operation and will be terminated.
You die.
You scored 0 out of 42 points in 519 moves, giving you a rank of n00b luser.
Would you like to restart, restore, undo or quit?
> use undo button
#&*( Segmentation fault, core dumped.


QuoteSurely we all agree that guess-the-verb situations are evil, but including "use" is pretty much the opposite.

Agreed. Any good text adventure has such a large vocabulary that verb-guessing isn't an issue. It is often cited as a problem with text adventures, but in reality that's a straw man as it has never been a problem with any decent text parser, and only comes up with a few amateur-made games, or the far less versatile verb+noun parser of old Sierra games.

Quote
And, last but not least:
- win game

Monkey Island has that command :)



> use the Force, Luke
What do you want to do with the Force?


Quote from: Radiant on Tue 13/06/2006 12:06:58
No, the point is that most fans of the IF genre disagree with you that this would be an improvement, or this simple change would have been made long ago.

Regardless of what you and most of the other fans think, I believe that accepting "use" in select cases where it's clear what the player wants to do would be an improvement. But this isn't going anywhere. We disagree, and neither of us are ever going to give up any ground. Let's stop.

I heartily agree, lets stop, lets discuss some of our fave IF adventures, wwhat we liked, what we didn't like, but lets not start a war.

Quote from: Erenan on Tue 13/06/2006 20:41:43
We disagree, and neither of us are ever going to give up any ground. Let's stop.

Yeah, ok.

As lo_res suggested, let's instead discuss some of our fave IF adventures... anyone familiar with the Spellcasting series? The magic system is quite nice.

I finished 101 and enjoyed it immensely. (When I read Harry Potter it reminded me a lot of the university.)
201, I got stuck wandering around the (island/resort?) with not enough direction, so I gave up.
That was 12 or so years ago though. So long ago that I don't even remember the magic system. :=
On the other hand, I remember pretty well the Enchanter magic system, and I played that series longer ago than 1994. I thought it was great - then again, it was my first magic system. *Misty eyes*

You should give 201 another try; it's the best in the series imho. 301 was good as well (but extremely difficult) only the plot twist for the last chapter is about as bad as the ending of Monkey Island II.

The magic system is in fact the same as with Enchanter (except that you don't need to memorize things, you just cast them from your spellbook). That's because Legend was founded by some ex-Infocommies. S101, of course, features a wide array of improbable spells such as whale summoning. One of the funner spells was in S301, which had a 'spell mutation' spell. For instance, you had the Frimp spell of levitation, and could mutate it into the Frump spell of legislation. You could even mutate 'spell mutation' into 'shell mutation' :)

Oh yeah and I love Enchanter and Sorcerer, but found Spellbreaker entirely impossible.

Happy frotzing!

Quote from: Radiant on Wed 14/06/2006 16:15:20
only the plot twist for the last chapter is about as bad as the ending of Monkey Island II.

So it's really really good? ¬¬

It would have been good if Ron Gilbert had made it. but he didn't so we got what we got, I rather like CMI (but in general its too short, and the ending WAY too short) my fave IF? "Heist" "Leather Goddesses of Phobies" "Sorcery 101:Sorcerers get all the girls" "Eric the Unready" "Zork"

An enduring favourite is Gateway II. Well, Gateway is good as well, but II has a special charm for me. If you haven't played, please do.

I've only really played modern IF games.
So far my favorite is Shade. For some reason it's so terribly creepy and disturbing.
I have also yet to finish Anchorhead. I'm on the last chapter and I do plan on continuing with playing it soon. I feel it was better at the start of the game though.