Adventure Gamers - Forums

I devoted some of my free time recently to playing Return to Zork. I had never played it before, nor had I played any of the text-based adventures that preceded it. So I was going in rather fresh, but it’s my understanding that this game takes place many generations after the text games so the back-story isn’t all that critical (but maybe a bit helpful).

What a frustrating game. Illogical puzzles, no real direction, traps that make the game unbeatable… I thought that by the time the game was released (1993) that the mechanics and formula that went into a good adventure game had been established. We were past an era of games that didn’t give you an inch so that it would be drawn out.

Zork purists (if those exist) might call this game a good challenge. But man, this game just insults your intelligence. I found myself trying everything with everything else in each location just to progress. That’s not fun.

I didn’t bother trying to beat it. Not even with plenty of walkthroughs out there.

I’m complaining about a game that came out nearly 20 years ago. Why.

I guess that means you won’t be returning to Zork.

Not willingly.

Hawker Typhoon - 19 November 2012 11:41 PM

Zork purists (if those exist) might call this game a good challenge. But man, this game just insults your intelligence. I found myself trying everything with everything else in each location just to progress. That’s not fun.

That’s a common feeling with adventure games - how many have you played before? Most of the puzzles in Zork can be solved by a little bit of thinking, as with most many other adv games. Don’t feel bad about getting stuck, it happens to everyone! Yes, everyone!

Think about how much fun you would find it if you knew what to do at each location right away. Not much, I’m guessing!

“Want some Rye? ‘course you do!”

Truly terrible game. But golly, did that drunken guy give me some laughs. 

Zifnab - 20 November 2012 01:44 AM

Hawker Typhoon - 19 November 2012 11:41 PM

Zork purists (if those exist) might call this game a good challenge. But man, this game just insults your intelligence. I found myself trying everything with everything else in each location just to progress. That’s not fun.

That’s a common feeling with adventure games - how many have you played before? Most of the puzzles in Zork can be solved by a little bit of thinking, as with most many other adv games. Don’t feel bad about getting stuck, it happens to everyone! Yes, everyone!

Think about how much fun you would find it if you knew what to do at each location right away. Not much, I’m guessing!

I’ve played plenty of adventure games before (even Death Gate, Sartan!).

I’m not saying that I want a game to be flat out easy, but Return to Zork just felt so broken that it took any fun or sense of accomplishment away.

This kind of game structure would probably be forgivable a few years earlier (at the cost of not having digitized video) back when a lot of other adventures would punish you for neglecting to pick up an object at the get-go, or cutting when you should have dug, or giving when you should have just shown.

But 1993? By that time, we had Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Sam & Max, and then Gabriel Knight I was due out. Maybe not fair pitting it against the best, but still, there were examples available of what works.

I’ll give Zork credit for being imaginative. There’s enough there to keep you interested for a bit, but in the end it’s still poorly executed.

Hawker Typhoon - 20 November 2012 08:07 AM

Zifnab - 20 November 2012 01:44 AM

Hawker Typhoon - 19 November 2012 11:41 PM

Zork purists (if those exist) might call this game a good challenge. But man, this game just insults your intelligence. I found myself trying everything with everything else in each location just to progress. That’s not fun.

That’s a common feeling with adventure games - how many have you played before? Most of the puzzles in Zork can be solved by a little bit of thinking, as with most many other adv games. Don’t feel bad about getting stuck, it happens to everyone! Yes, everyone!

Think about how much fun you would find it if you knew what to do at each location right away. Not much, I’m guessing!

I’ve played plenty of adventure games before (even Death Gate, Sartan!).

Ah, then you are very knowledgeable indeed! I don’t think many would know my avatar.

I’m not saying that I want a game to be flat out easy, but Return to Zork just felt so broken that it took any fun or sense of accomplishment away.

This kind of game structure would probably be forgivable a few years earlier (at the cost of not having digitized video) back when a lot of other adventures would punish you for neglecting to pick up an object at the get-go, or cutting when you should have dug, or giving when you should have just shown.

But 1993? By that time, we had Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Sam & Max, and then Gabriel Knight I was due out. Maybe not fair pitting it against the best, but still, there were examples available of what works.

I’ll give Zork credit for being imaginative. There’s enough there to keep you interested for a bit, but in the end it’s still poorly executed.

I agree somewhat. I played RtZ at a friend’s house as a kid and although I only got to play the start I was sucked into an amazingly imaginative and humorous world. Played it again a few years ago and it wasn’t nearly as impressive because I saw all the flaws. But I still am left with that initial impression.

And you might consider a dead end in a game as ‘broken’ but not everyone does. The developers obviously didn’t.

I would argue that when a team is designing a game, it’s much more difficult to “map” out an adventure game with no dead-ends, as in ‘A’ occurs before ‘B’, and ‘B’ cannot occur before ‘A’. And it must be done in a logical manner so it doesn’t feel out of place. And it must also be done in a way where it is still challenging.

But a game like Return to Zork, with all of its dead-ends and death traps, would not require the same amount of effort. A great deal of the challenge lies in saving the game a hundred times and taking pictures of everything, and other monotonous tasks.

I think that this game focused much more on style over substance, what with its FMV sequences, and all other concerns were secondary (although again some thought was put into the environments). But even the game interface was clunky.

Ah yes, one of my “favorite” oh-so-bad-games.  Let’s not forget the unforgivable woods maze wherein every frame looked exactly like the other or the dreary music interspersed with giddy circus music in the oddest places.  But still you could tell that a lot of time had been spent in creating it, especially the interface which has to be the most complicated I’ve ever seen.  The “want some rye” segment was a lot of fun though, I’ll have to admit.

Still, don’t let it deter you from playing Zork Nemesis or Zork Grand Inquisitor which are very good games.

Dara100 - 20 November 2012 11:19 AM

Still, don’t let it deter you from playing Zork Nemesis or Zork Grand Inquisitor which are very good games.

Funny, I got Zork Nemesis years ago as it came bundled with Spycraft. But I could never get Zork to run.