[stinking_dylan]

Oh, I remember that product catalogue =)

I see what you mean about experimenting with the text interface. What I'm saying is that the text interface is what their all about. If you add in other control and presentation methods, then you may as well go all the way and make a graphical adventure rather than something in between.

Maps are helpfull, but I much prefer paper maps from the box. Maps which did not show actual locations, but rather looked like a traditional map didn't break the feeling of a novel. Little boxes with lines between them made me feel like I was playing a board game and moving a piece around. I preffered them to be more abstract.

Of course, each to their own. This is just the what attracted me to text games =)

[Blue Biro]

Interesting discussion, Moriarty.

I was very into adventure games in the 1980s, but quite a few years passed before I started thinking about getting back into them a few months ago. I was quite surprised - and pleased! - to see the IF term bandied about. It made me think, "Hey, the developers are taking things more seriously, and are putting the emphasis in the right place - i.e. storytelling."

On reflection, though, it does sound like snobbish distancing. And after all, what are games like Monkey Island, Silent Hill, Prince of Persia and the like? Non-interactive non-fiction? Hardly!

So, a better alternative term for "adventure game" might be "interactive text", or, for the posh and the highbrow, "interactive prose".

In conclusion, I think it's okay to describe an adventure game as "a quality piece of interactive fiction", but to use it as a replacement label is wrong, because it does indeed exclude things which are just as entitled to be included.

In short, I agree on that point.

The other point - no. It's true that you rarely read a novel in which we're told, "Jack went northwest down the road," but that's because we don't need to know the direction in a novel. We do need to know the direction in a TA because it's information that we require in order to interact. If a road leads north, an alley leads east, another road leads south, and a sideroad leads west, we can reasonably expect this to lead us back to our starting point.

The simple graphic map can be done - has been done - but to my mind it detracts from the sense of exploration, and (paradoxically) diminishes the sense of being in control. I want to know where I am and which way I can go, because that's like real life. And of course I want things to happen which don't happen in real life, because that's why I'm playing a game and not going for a walk!

[Eleri]

Hmm. I think I've lost the train of the discussion somewhere in here, but I'm trying to follow. Not enough soda, maybe.

Not being a hard-core adventure gamer, and hip to the lingo, when I use the term "Interactive Fiction" or, sometimes "Reciprocal Storytelling", I mean something specific, wherein the player/user/whatever has a direct effect on the flow of the story. Not just that you're a part of with the story, al la text adventures or choose-your-ending decisions, but that when you do something, it has a fundamental effect on how the story plays out. LARPs are interactive fiction, even some re-enactment groups like the SCA border on interactive fiction. Not many computer games would fall into that category. Even most multiplayer MMOs have a fixed story, that you don't impact at all.

I think Uru is going to hit the nail on the head, though. Dynamic content, changing story based on player actions and interactions. I'd venture to say that Uru is less a game, and more of an enviroment where story takes place.

[Crapstorm]

I am not sure if Infocom originally coined the term "interactive fiction," but they used it in marketting for all of their adventure games. Since then, it has been a synonym for text adventures. Applying the term now to all games that contain a fictional narrative seems rather pointless to me.

[beatchef]

Farenheit, Dreamfall and Another Code are Interactive Fiction because you don't really ever actually do anything but you don't care because the story is good

[eriktorbjorn]

Originally Posted by Crapstorm

I am not sure if Infocom originally coined the term "interactive fiction," but they used it in marketting for all of their adventure games. Since then, it has been a synonym for text adventures. Applying the term now to all games that contain a fictional narrative seems rather pointless to me.

They didn't use the phrase from the very beginning, though. Before "interactive fiction" there was "INTERLOGIC", e.g. "DEADLINE: An INTERLOGIC Mystery". Some games changed label when they were updated, e.g. early releases of Enchanter are "INTERLOGIC Fantasy" while later ones are "Infocom interactive fiction - a fantasy story". Whoever did coin the term "interactive fiction" probably did it after Infocom went into business, at least.