Searching for Imaginative Space? Apply From Within.

infocom_ad1The recent excitement, and subsequent furor, over the new Legends of Zork browser-based online roleplaying game inspired me to think about how much we have changed as a gamer culture since the days of text-based adventure games.

For many of us, Zork hangs among our earliest memories of computer games. In many ways the series’ massive fanbase – in its entire gamut of casual and hardcore and obsessive players – is our miniature equivalent of the Star Wars fanbase: it is rabid.. it demands quality.. it cannot tolerate any deviation from canon.

So designing a new game based on the Zork franchise was a dicey and dangerous decision, especially considering the close ties the series has with the history of video games in general (it was among the first games derived from Colossal Cave Adventure). Stakes were high for everyone involved.

Yet, for every aging gamer out there worried about how the latest instalment of the Zork series would fare, there are 1000 more that did not grow up with text adventures. They did not get eaten by grues. They did not integrate the bizarre and off-kilter humor of The Great Underground Empire into their jargon. They are not used to directing a game’s action through computer-parsed language. They do not have to imagine themselves into a world constituted by text.

A Short Review

Here are a few comments selected from the aforementioned thread:

“That is my main and only complaint about the game: it’s absolutely passive. It’s the exact contrary of every other Zork game, where it was your wits and skills that saved the say rather than an automatic dice roll.”

“I like it and I’m playing it(played some beta aswell). I never played the original and frankly; I don’t wanna play text based rpg in this day and age.”

“I have a workmate who did grow up with the Zork originals and I pointed him in the direction of LoZ. His reaction is quite the opposite than John Biggs’ whereby he moans at me there aren’t enough action points in the new one (suggesting he wants to keep playing) but when he tried out the Flash based originals again, he was, like I was, simply frustrated by the continuous ‘I do not understand that word’ type of comments, and not knowing what phrases are actually accepted by the game.”

“Point and click/graphical games always will pale to each of our individual Zork experiences — at least for those of us who played the original text games. LoZ is the same. It isn’t much for “Zorkiness” as it’s a totally different style of game. But I really enjoy it.”

“Legends of Zork is the kind of game that you play for 10-15 minutes in the morning, between checking your e-mail and reading the news. It’s an entertaining diversion.”

loz-3

These mixed reactions provide an interesting cross-section what happens when people have to make sense of a twist in the path. As several of the commenters point out, Legends of Zork is a turn-based lightweight RPG that is very reminiscent of the BBS door game Legend of the Red Dragon: you walk from town into the forest, kill monsters, return to town with loot, and rest when your hit points are low. In many ways, it is a browser-based incarnation of Diablo, sans a coherent storyline. All battles are decided through visible statistics: an encounter with an enemy plays back a script that describes hit percentages, chances of winning, experiences points gained, HPs lost, and zorkmids won. All and all, the game is a fantastic reinterpretation of hack’n’slash games, repackaged with an eye for 15-minute casual gaming. The artwork comprising the interface reminds me of both Professor Layton and the Curious Village, as well as The Curse of Monkey Island, and seems to do the trick.

Living with Cultural Change

infocom-2Yet, if I may summarize the collective reaction, it goes something like this: “It’s a fun, cute, game. I can see some people liking it. But it’s no Zork.”

Beyond the pessimism of nostalgia, I think gamers have recognized that something is indeed missing in the formula. Sure, the writing might not be as humorous. Sure, the art style might not suit some people. Sure, going into statistical battles ain’t too much fun after a while. But I think something deeper, more dangerous, lies at the heart of the issue.

The problem is that Legends of Zork is the distant echo of a death knell that rang out in the 1990s when text adventures lost their sheen, and were replaced by clumsy graphical interpretations. Soon afterwards, graphical adventure games themselves were tossed in favour of real-time tactical and FPS games. A rift in our way of living, as gamers, has opened up between the 1980s and the present. Legends of Zork, while a noble attempt at bridging the gap between these alienated gaming eras, has only shown us just how wide the gap is.

The Dialectics of the Imagination and the Game

When I sit down to Zork I: The Great Underground Empire, I am greeted by a stark black space. I hit return – the space fills with white text against the black space – words! My eyes skim across the white-on-black space: I do not see words, I imagine places. I see things. I am located somewhere. The world opens up around me.

West of House
You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
There is a small mailbox here. 

I am standing west of the white house. I imagine the texture of the boarded front door: When I was a young boy, there was an abandoned home down the street that I used to sneak into, and steal utensils from its dusty kitchen. The window was boarded up with rough spruce plywood, with a dark knot nestled into the top right corner. It is that rough piece of plywood that I imagine on the front door of the white house. The fear and excitement of the abandoned home is sparked in me for a moment – I do not consciously remember the abandoned home as I play – but the feelings it evokes persist.

I look over at the mailbox. The mailbox is the standard issue grey American mailbox that stands at the end of one’s yard. I recognize it from a scene in Stand By Me in which a group of hooligans drives around smashing mailboxes with a baseball bat. While I do not consciously remember the scene, my limited experience with Americana is stirred for a second.

Curious of the mailbox, my fingers dance over the keys on the keyboard – my eyes fixed on the screen. I do not consciously notice the keys clacking under my fingertips, but my intentions – my whole imagination – leans toward the mailbox.

>look in mailbox
The small mailbox is closed.

I smirk a bit realizing how silly my action was – the world resists my clumsy intentions. I try again. This time my hands know exactly what to do. My fingers walk me to the mailbox.

>open mailbox
Opening the small mailbox reveals a leaflet.

It is one of the leaflets that I stuffed into people’s mailboxes in 1988, when I helped my mother distribute advertisements for a friend of hers who was running in a local election. I was nine years old. The leaflets were a bright orange, filled with text about the “New Democratic Party”. A large dog chased me from one of the yards, and I ran back to our Ford Econoline van, screaming and crying. It is that orange leaflet that I find in the mailbox, but I do not consciously recall the childhood memory of the leaflet – I am only filled with a sense of foreboding sparked by the terrifying dog. A call to adventure. I pick up the leaflet and read it.

"WELCOME TO ZORK!
ZORK is a game of adventure, danger, and low cunning. In it you will explore some of the most amazing territory ever seen by mortals. No computer should be without one!"

I laugh and the tension is relieved. There is something strange about this place – a world that is part fictional world and part my world. I should be writing my dissertation, and the thought of it provokes guilt in me, but I want to play along. I want to be in the Great Underground Empire, just for a little while.

Imagination Lost

Legends of Zork is neither a bad game, nor is it a trivialization of the Zork series. It is the expression of the generational gap we find ourselves in today.

loz-1

When I stare at the map of the Great Underground Empire as the creators of LoZ imagine it, my eyes take in the gorgeously drawn map – not the places themselves – but the world as seen from a bird’s eye view. I do not walk through the world. My fingers do not dance over the keyboard and do the walking for me. I point with my cursor, and the cursor – the computer and its algorithms – transports me to another place. I magically re-appear in front of the white house. But this is not the abandoned white house of my youth. It is not the house that I stole a rusted swiss-army knife from. It is a white house that corresponds to a popular modern children’s art style. It evokes nothing for me.

I click on the Dark Forest just as I would click on a news link or an RSS feed. The page reloads, and I am presented with a cute illustration of a forest and troll. I am about to choose whether I should run away or fight, but an AJAX script instead takes over and plays back the results of the battle – I do nothing. To the left of the adventure window is a menu that allows me to read a FAQ, change my account settings, or read posts over at the forums.

After a while, my interest wanes. I realize that the game is, for all intents and purposes, a wonderful thing in its own right. It is a game crafted for my 13-year-old cousin who spends most of his day on Facebook. It is crafted for him and his generation, because sitting in front of a black-and-white screen and walking through the world using his fingertips is not possible anymore. He does not imagine himself as a part of the Great Underground Empire, nor is he beckoned by the mailbox. He wants action and he wants cute illustration and he wants it now. He will use up his fifteen minutes of “action points” today and come back to the game tomorrow, nestled in between Twittering and posting his Facebook status. If I ask him, the art style will likely remind him of a handful of Miyazaki films that he’s seen. But it is not a part of his life – it is a part of his day.

Finding the Bridgeheads

We are likely to see more games like Legends of Zork in the future, and I welcome them. These kinds of games will come to define the basis for meaning for an entire generation of gamers that are coming into their own now, just as some of us did in the 1980s. No doubt some of those gamers will eventually come to reflect, not without a touch of sadness, that the games they played and loved as children are gone too.

I do not mourn the loss of text-adventure games; after all, I suspect that more text adventures are being crafted in the homes of indie game designers than ever were created back in the day. What I mourn is the loss of a way of life. Gamer culture has changed so much that a new Zork adventure game no longer would make sense to us. And we know it ourselves: one commenter said that he was “simply frustrated by the continuous ‘I do not understand that word’ type of comments, and not knowing what phrases are actually accepted by the game.”

fallout3-1

I am fragmented inside. Part of who I am – my identity as a gamer – still lives in a world where my fingertips walked me through the Great Underground Empire like little feet in a vast geography. The GUE is world that lives only in my fingertips and my mind; the game itself is only a focus for my imagination. But it is the past, and I can only look back it over a great distance. 

Another part of me lives in the present. I walk in the Fallout 3 world by holding down the ‘W’ key. Every detail of that world – from the shapes of the mountains to the kinds of needles on the trees, has been provided for me. When I reach out to open a mailbox, I never fail. I hit the ‘E’ key. I cannot fail at opening the mailbox for a computer algorithm opens the mailbox for me. The mailbox opens without the help of my imagination.

Bridging the gap between these two estranged worlds requires something more than a translation of Zork for a new audience. It requires that we, as gamers, discover new ways of using our imaginations in a world that all but prevents us from doing so. It requires that we, as developers, discover ways of expressing subtlety and nuance using whatever tools we have. It requires that we, as an older generation, find common ground with younger gamers and share in new gaming experiences with them. The outrage levied at Legends of Zork is in many ways unfounded; it is a projection of anger stemming from our social anomie.

Until we locate those bridgeheads and begin building common experiences between them, I think that we will find ourselves constantly disappointed with anything new.

Post to Twitter

  1. Rubes’s avatar

    Excellent article, it really summed up my feelings about LoZ as well. But then, I suspect we are both cut from the same cloth.

    I’d be interested to hear what you think about my little project. It may not work, it may make no sense, but I gotta believe somebody has to try it. Check out the website link if you’re interested.

  2. chris’s avatar

    Thanks Rubes! I felt very much the same as some of the folks in the comment thread – it was sad to see such a wonderful execution (programming, art, interface) come down upon so heavily by Zork fans.

    Funny – I’ve been keeping up with your posts on Vespers since I started writing here ;) Your blog was one of the earliest I read (I believe I got there through through Michael Abbott’s comment thread IIRC). I’m fascinated by your project – there is something very wild about translating a text adventure into a 3D game! Vespers 3D reminds me of Alone in the Dark a little bit – a semi-gothic artistic style.

    Although I was not clear about it in the article – there is no reason that a modern interpretation of an old game can’t bridge the gap between generations. It’s just that LoZ, for many reasons that should be discussed, has not managed to do this (yet). The fact that your project is totally unique in its goals and its execution is why I’ve kept up with it over the years. Nobody has done this before, and exploring a new kind of game is exactly what developers should have been doing all along.

    If you compare your own project so far, with LoZ, do any major differences jump out at you? It seems like one of the differences, to me at least, is that you’re making an honest effort at preserving the intent/style of the original game. One of the difficulties LoZ has is that it never quite decides what it wants to be – is it a social networking game? Is it RPG-lite? Is it an adventure? Is it a MUD? Vespers (to me) is quite clearly a text adventure – the 3D graphics are an addition.. a way of establishing mood and atmosphere.. I can’t wait to play it and see what it’s actually like. :)

  3. Dave’s avatar

    Thanks for taking the time to really think about the game and our approach to the Zork license. Your article is probably the most balanced and insightful yet written about Legends of Zork.

    I find that all games, even those which visually represent every detail of the game environment, need me to use my imagination to fully immerse myself, LoZ included. I have to go beyond the graphics and obvious limits of the game design to actually care about my avatar. That can be something as simple as developing my own internal narrative as I play, relishing a sense of exploration, or allowing myself to feel that what I do in a game matters to me.

    Some games really help you with this. Bioshock made the moral choice of how to treat the Little Sisters a very difficult one for me to make. Obviously they are just power-ups, but I preferred to play that choice as though it was a real dilemma.

    Even when you have little input into what happens – such as the death of Sergeant Paul Jackson in CoD: Modern Warfare, you have to rely on your imagination to really experience that moment. I feel that other games, such as Call of Juarez, give you too little freedom to exercise your own imagination, even though they do attempt to provide a satisfying plot.

    Now that I think about it, perhaps it might be worth exploring the analogy between artistic representations of reality before and after the invention of photography, and the problem of how our imaginations can be allowed to engage with games that do all the work of visually describing the game world. We need to go beyond simply trying to evoke a vision of the environment.

    I had better stop this rambling monologue and get back to writing up docs for the future development of LoZ. Thanks again for a very thoughtful piece.

    Dave Barton
    LoZ Game Designer

  4. gnome’s avatar

    Excellent and very fair piece Chris. I think I actually also agree, though I must admit I would have been much happier if LoZ was only better done. If it actually used the world of Zork and was a bit more verbose in its descriptions. Oh, and frankly I just couldn’t care less about the economics behind facebook games. And Zork will always be brilliant and -what’s important- will probably not age for a long time.

  5. chris’s avatar

    @Dave – Thank you for your excellent thoughts. I agree – it’s not necessarily true that heavily graphics-oriented games cannot spark the imagination. In fact, in many ways Planescape: Torment (sigh, how many times am I going to bring that game up?) was visually impressive in its time, yet it managed to evoke Sigil in a way not done before. It was how I would imagine it, even though the art style was different from the original illustrations.

    I guess the question is – how much are we willing to ‘force’ the imagination into the world, or can the author do something to ‘invite’ us into it? I did not find the moral choices in Bioshock to be of much personal consequence to me — I found that I was forcing myself to care about the characters. When I force myself to believe or care about the world, I know that something is wrong… like I’m grasping at straws. I never get that feeling in games that give me something to latch on to, like the Ultima series (which brilliantly characterizes its NPCs), or The Longest Journey (April is a wonderful character). I’ll have to try CoD: Modern Warfare and Call of Juarez.

    As for looking at artistic representations before/after photography, I *swear* that you are reading my mind. I’m reading a book on that *very* topic right now – it’s called “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger. I will also be looking at J.H. Van den Berg’s “Divided Existence” which tells the history of photography vis-a-vis modernism. You’re dead on here – do you mind if I use your idea for a part of my dissertation? We have become increasingly dependent upon “photorealism” – but not many of us have developed the psychological means that would allow us to still use our imaginations as we look at very detailed scenes.

    @gnome – Well, in all fairness LoZ is still in development and I’m expecting the world to become increasingly ‘thicker’ as time goes on. The forums are very active, and there is a demand for the kinds of things you want (and I want) to see. Agreed – there is something timeless about Zork… an ex-girlfriend of mine posted a list of her favourite games, and #1 on it was Zork I. It’s been 30 years. Amazing.

  6. Dave’s avatar

    Please do make use of that idea. I look forward to future posts on these topics.

    I believe I’ve heard of Ways of Seeing before. Quite some time ago. I must look into it further. I see that it’s based on an old BBC series. Interesting.

    Your point about forcing yourself to care is a valid one. I think that I often deliberately pretend to myself that I feel something in games so as to satisfy my own need for an engaging narrative. It’s a form of self-deception that is necessary for me to derive pleasure from what can sometimes be, in its worst incarnations, a hollow and clumsy form of entertainment.

    I often find that the worst experience is when a designer allows a narrative to obstruct the game. That was the problem with Call of Juarez. The story wasn’t bad, but I found myself impatiently waiting to play the actual game. I then found that I really didn’t care about any of the characters. They were just there to provide a background story to the action sequences. Games that place you into situations where you rely on NPCs, especially where you explore or fight alongside them, have a much greater chance of eliciting an emotional response. Half-Life 2, for instance, succeeded in making me feel the loneliness of travelling alone when separated from helpful NPCs.

    Even multiplayer games like Red Orchestra or the old Day of Defeat mod can have this effect. There’s nothing worse than suddenly finding yourself completely cut off from your comrades in a game where you really feel the need for a group effort. Your fellow players are admittedly real people, but making me care about capturing the objective or keeping them alive (in Left4Dead, for example) emerges from skilful game design. This only holds true if you let yourself care about the game, of course, which is again more self-deception.

    The Thief series of games made me care about my own safety in the world. My imagination was utterly pulled into the game. I actually had to stop playing Deadly Shadows at times because I couldn’t deal with the fact that I felt so threatened. Actually, Doom 3 sometimes gave me that feeling, too, and I can only play Dead Space or Stalker for short periods before becoming overwhelmed by the atmosphere. Assassin’s Creed utterly failed to engage me on that level even though it looked incredible.

    I have departed to some extent from what we’re talking about, in that I am now referring to how immersive those games are, but maybe that’s how increasingly realistic games have to reach us. We don’t have to use our imaginations to visualise the game, but we can use our imaginations to bring something more to the experience.

    I used to read gamebooks (the Ian Livingstone and Steve Jackson Fighting Fantasy series) when I was very young. They allowed my imagination to really bring those worlds to life. And I have vivid memories of them. But I also have vivid memories of moments from certain very realistic games. The same goes for novels and films. Both require different parts of my imagination to bring them to life.

    The difference is that I could no longer play a text adventure or read a gamebook. I suspect that the gamebooks would no longer interest me because of the writing, as I did read a novel in the form of a gamebook a few years ago called Life’s Lottery by Kim Newman. That was very enjoyable. But I can’t play text adventures. I don’t even know why, which worries me. Somehow I no longer have the patience.

    Again, I had better stop rambling. I do wonder how games will develop in the future. Perhaps we will have less and less time to engage with players, creating games which will be consumed in short bursts but over an extended period. An interesting challenge.

  7. chris’s avatar

    @Dave – It’s interesting when a narrative is clumsily shoehorned into a game… I suspect that is the rule rather than the exception these days. I like your insight regarding NPCs… they *do* make the world a little less lonely! I was playing Fallout 3 last night, and I realized that after exploring the Wastes for an hour I was wishing to myself “I sure hope I run into a village soon…” The problem in the end is that the NPCs are not ‘people’ in the game … they’re robotic AI with a narrative attached to them. It’s very difficult to pinpoint exactly why the F3 (and Oblivion) NPCs fail so miserably though.

    Thief 1 and 2 (I didn’t play Deadly Shadows) immediately drew me into the world through its mood, atmosphere, and very cleverly integrated story. I agree that it, in the end, has little to do with the graphical quality – I think it’s more about the *artistic* quality of the game. It’s the subtleties — the steampunk machines of Thief aren’t thrown in-your-face … they’re juxtaposed against the medieval guards and lords. It lets the imagination roam on its own, and come up with its own story that fills in the gaps.

    “Somehow I no longer have the patience”. This is the point I was trying to get at in the entire article. The games have not changed at all – but we have as gamers. The games are still as good (or bad) as they ever were, but we no longer possess the kinds of imagination/skill/emotions necessary to bring a text adventure to life again. I’m speaking generally, because of course there are thousands of people out there who play IF games still (won’t someone please speak up?)… but most of us have this sense that we wouldn’t even know how to play a text adventure anymore without tossing our hands up in frustration or boredom.

    Thanks for bringing up the point that ‘graphical realism’ doesn’t matter in itself. You’re absolutely right there, and in fact have provided a resolution to a discussion that has plagued this blog for 3 years. But what does matter, I think, is that as our imaginations and emotions have atrophied in the last couple of decades we’ve increasingly come to rely upon graphical realism to fill in that void. And it’s not working too well, except for those of us who’ve hung on to some of our imaginative abilities.

  8. wordsmythe’s avatar

    A recent interview with Steve Meretzky covered, in part, the fall of IF and what made it popular previously. Thought I’d pass it on.
    http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/04/game_design_legends_meretzky_o.php

  9. chris’s avatar

    Thanks for the heads-up wordsmythe (love your site btw)!
    I find that Meretzky’s thoughts on the popularity of IF lead me to more questions than they do answers. IF was “cutting-edge” technology in its time, but that does not explain it’s appeal today. He seems to be more looking back at it with a 20/20 Hindsight kind of view, and it seems like he’s justifying *today’s* games more than he is the IF of the past. “Text adventures in 1986 weren’t that different from text adventures in 1981″ might be loosely true from a technological standpoint, but from a poetic/artistic standpoint they were totally different… try comparing Fred Pohl’s “Gateway” to “Zork” and there is a pretty shocking difference in narrative quality. As I said – he brings up the right questions, that’s for sure!

  10. wordsmythe’s avatar

    I absolutely agree, Chris. Since technology has moved on, IF has had a chance to play to its own strengths. It makes me wonder about the inherent strengths of other interactive formats, and how those formats may come to shine on their own once the mainstream giants leave them to indie developers.

    Some day I hope I get the chance to really sit down and look at the strengths and weaknesses of all the different videogame formats. It seems like such fun!

  11. Chris B’s avatar

    I’m actually a fan of the old text based adventures. They had a lot more detail put into them than a lot of games nowadays. The stories are great, and the imagination does a great job of showing the game world given the little text provided. Kind of like reading a book. I sometimes dislike movies based on books/comics/etc because they ruin the image I had to be replaced by something boring and, IMO, sub par. Oh, and they’re usually free which is great value. :P

    I still like my HL2, Witcher and such. But the text based games are worth a play.

  12. chris’s avatar

    @Chris B – Glad to hear that there are still some IF fans left in the universe! I agree – text can be simply evocative in itself. Can you recommend a few text adventures for the other readers here, including myself? I’ve recently been back into playing IF games, and I honestly have an impoverished background when it comes to IF.