Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
Difficulty Rating Infocom Style
How do Legend, Sierra, and other adventure games compare to Infocom games in terms of difficulty? Would any non-Infocom adventure game qualify for more than introductory level (other than Timequest I guess)? How much difference does each level encompass (how much easier is the the easiest standard Infocom game than the toughest, easiest advanced vs. toughest advanced, etc.)?
How do Legend, Sierra, and other adventure games compare to Infocom games in terms of difficulty?
That’s a very general and therefore difficult question to answer. Can you be more specific? What games do you have in mind?
Would any non-Infocom adventure game qualify for more than introductory level (other than Timequest I guess)?
Of course. So many games, so many levels.
How much difference does each level encompass (how much easier is the the easiest standard Infocom game than the toughest, easiest advanced vs. toughest advanced, etc.)?
I’d like to help you but you’ve lost me. Do you want to know if you’d enjoy certain games?
BTW, I miss Wilco and his interesting posts.
See you around, wolf. Nerissa
Pardon the lack of clarity—I wasn’t really sure how to word the starting post properly. What I had in mind was to give various adventure games an Infocom difficulty rating. Hypothetical example:
Secret of Monkey Island - introductory
Callahan’s Crosstime Saloon - standard
Timequest - expert
Colonel’s Bequest - standard
and so on
The Legend games were mostly what I was curious about although it would be interesting to see how Sierra, LucasArts, and other games would rate and compare in difficulty. I was wondering if there were any games that would equate to a typical advanced level Infocom game in terms of difficulty to get an idea of what to expect for each level.
Pardon the lack of clarity—I wasn’t really sure how to word the starting post properly. What I had in mind was to give various adventure games an Infocom difficulty rating. Hypothetical example:
Secret of Monkey Island - introductory
Callahan’s Crosstime Saloon - standard
Timequest - expert
Colonel’s Bequest - standard
Ah, I see now. I played MI a very long time ago but I don’t remember it as easy, so my own rating would be standard.
The Legend games were mostly what I was curious about although it would be interesting to see how Sierra, LucasArts, and other games would rate and compare in difficulty. I was wondering if there were any games that would equate to a typical advanced level Infocom game in terms of difficulty to get an idea of what to expect for each level.
The problem is of course the accuracy of the ratings. If my memory serves me well, Infocom only rated their earliest games. But here’s my list of the Legend games I’ve played. You decide if it’s useful.
Eric the Unready - I/S
Death Gate - I/S
The Blackstone Chronicles - S
TimeQuest (my favorite Legend game) - E
Callahan’s - S (with the exception of the advanced pubquiz)
Gateway 1 and 2 - S
Mission Critical - A
Spellcasting series - S/A
I’d rate most Sierra games as standard. Some are very easy, like the Phantasmagoria ones, so introductory. LucasArts games are harder: either standard or advanced. Generally speaking, that goes for most adventures. But story-driven games and walking sims with only a few puzzles are always introductory: What Remains of Edith Finch; The Vanishing of Ethan Carter; Immortality; The Excavation of Hob’s Barrow; The Wolf Among Us. And then there are the puzzle games on the other end of the difficulty spectrum: The Witness; Taiji; Inscryption.
See you around, wolf. Nerissa
I have hardly any experience with Infocom, but I’ve read about the games, and thought the difficulty rating system was interesting. I thought their games were known for their difficulty. I’m guessing Seastalker would be the easiest, but I actually didn’t know what to do when I tried it (although I didn’t have any feelies). I figured standard would be tough for me as I haven’t solved many games without help, but I did finish both Gateway games without outside help (although I checked the hintbook for the first game afterwards since I had missed a couple of points).
I read somewhere that advanced level isn’t always tougher than standard because it’s more about recommending which games would be good to start with, like an advanced game would be more recommended for someone with plenty of experience with Infocom games than for someone trying them for the first time regardless of difficulty. This would explain why you considered AMFV easy despite being rated advanced (I’m a lurker).
While it was only hypothetical, I think I labeled Monkey Island introductory because I was thinking of Bob Bates saying the point-and-click games weren’t hard at all, but I guess that may not be saying a lot coming from someone used to solving British crossword puzzles.
If you were referring to the word puzzle at the beginning of the game in Callahan’s, I doubt I’ll be able to get through that without looking it up. Despite being American, I’m not familiar with a lot of things others might be—I wasn’t familiar with the Crosby Nash example given, and probably never would have come up with that on my own.
From what I’ve read, I think the last Infocom game rated was Hollywood Hijinks or maybe Moonmist (if that’s the last one released in 1986).
I’m not too familiar with Infocom, but I used to play Legend games as a teen, thinking I was so smart to solve those text-heavy almost-IF adventures by myself. After replaying some of them in recent years I discovered they are not really all that hard. I’d given Gateway 2, DeathGate, Shannara introductory rating, Gateway 1 and Callahan’s — standard, TimeQuest/Mission Critical — closer to advanced, although the latter was more exhausting than hard. Personally I found all Myst games to be harder, as well as some of the games I played recently like Rama/Shivers 2 by Sierra, Pandora Directive by Access, Black Dahlia by Take Two. Still not sure whether they fit the “expert” rating, especially since they lack dead ends and most likely have fewer deaths than any Infocom title.
I already mentioned a cool adventure blog The Digital Aniquarian which contains a lot of interesting information about Legend games and their development history based on his interviews with Bob Bates and Mike Verdu. Bates in particular mentioned how he grew up enjoying solving complex puzzles, but by the time he reached Infocom they already changed their politics towards more casual gamers and easier puzzle design. So TimeQuest was the way he always wanted to design games, but then Legend faced similar problems and also had to reduce the difficulty level and focus on literary adaptations to stay afloat.
PC means personal computer
@Dreamventure. If you’d like to try an Infocom game I recommend Wishbringer, rating introductory. You can solve puzzles either by magic (spells) or by logic (inventory objects). Excellent writing and great fun.
Yeah, AMFV is definitely not hard puzzlewise (I remember only one or two puzzles near the end) but gameplay is complicated at first. You have to get familiar with the use of many abbreviations, all kinds of documents, and how to switch between modes. I guess that’s why the rating is advanced.
@Doom. Infocom described their difficulty ratings as follows:
Introductory: Best introduction to interactive fiction, with some built-in hints. Written for everyone from age 9 up.
Standard: This is Infocom’s most popular level of interactive fiction, enjoyed by both first-time and experienced players.
Advanced: A greater level of challenge. Recommended for those who’ve already experienced Infocom’s interactive fiction.
Expert: The ultimate challenge in interactive fiction.
Pretty vague descriptions. But I agree with Dreamventure that Infocom also had experience with text adventures in mind, not just the actual difficulty.
PS: Dreamventure, you said you didn’t have the Seastalker feelies. Are you familiar with this site? http://infocom.elsewhere.org/gallery/
Very useful site with pics of the contents of the game boxes including feelies; you can read manuals and other documents.
See you around, wolf. Nerissa
I’d given Gateway 2, DeathGate, Shannara introductory rating, Gateway 1 and Callahan’s — standard
You found Gateway 2 easier than the first game? I thought I had read the second game was a little tougher. I actually thought Gateway 1 seemed about as easy as Eric the Unready (even though I technically didn’t beat the latter without consulting the hintbook although it was just an accidental glimpse at a vague hint).
I’ve been reading the Digital Antiquarian for a little while. It was actually the Timequest article that included an interview with Bob Bates that I read he said the point-and-click games weren’t hard at all, and that British crossword puzzles were second nature to him. It was extremely interesting that someone like that would have trouble solving his own game after he forgot all its puzzles. I think that interview is evidence that Timequest wasn’t the most well-designed game in hindsight (unless you think Bob Bates’ design philosophy has changed for the worse since then).
I agree with Dreamventure that Infocom also had experience with text adventures in mind, not just the actual difficulty.
Technically, you’re agreeing with some people who posted on maybe a Yahoo group or whatever site I read the discussion.
I’m not old enough to remember anything that happened before the 1990’s, so that’s one reason I missed out on Infocom (I think Trinity was the first game of theirs that wasn’t released before I was born). The only Infocom games I have are the ones in the Zork Anthology from gog, so I have no physical feelies for any of the games. I thought I read that Seastalker is for juvenile players, and it’s solvable for adults without feelies. Despite introductory level supposedly being for juvenile players, I’ve read that it is possible for older players to find them patience-trying or frustrating, so I was wondering if Infocom’s idea of juvenile-level difficulty was a bit tougher than Legend’s text games (with the obvious exception of Timequest).
Pretty vague descriptions. But I agree with Dreamventure that Infocom also had experience with text adventures in mind, not just the actual difficulty.
This actually sounds like a useful feature. I tried playing some IFs without reading much about them beforehand and always got frustrated after a while because of the navigation issues, the limited inventory and moves, dead ends I expected on every turn and, of course, parsers that didn’t understand me. I guess they require different thinking compared to graphic adventures. I’d like to start with an easier game by Brian Moriarty.
You found Gateway 2 easier than the first game? I thought I had read the second game was a little tougher.
Yes, in fact both on my first and second playthroughs. The sequel was too linear and you rarely had to figure out what to do, tasks simply appeared along the way. Also the dialogue system was simplified similar to Eric the Unready, while puzzles that required imagination (where you had to perform something using only the parser) were abandoned.
I do think Legend’s design philosophy changed for the worst, this was especially evident in Death Gate. While I loved the game, it had so many missed opportunities. Like instead of exploring all realms at once we were always stuck in one small area with linear quests, while the spell system was oversimplified and we rarely used one spell more than once. TimeQuest — which has been also my favourite Legend since I played it — had no hand-holding which led to many imaginative puzzles. They didn’t always work out very well (although I actually enjoyed that particular puzzle they discussed with Bates), but those that did got stuck in my memory for years. Not to mention great writing.
PC means personal computer
I actually enjoyed that particular puzzle they discussed with Bates
You mean the one with all the girls? The fact Mr. Bates couldn’t figure out a hint he implemented himself and had to brute force the puzzle really says something about how bad of an idea it was in hindsight—it made more sense from the perspective of a puzzle designer than a player who wants to immerse him/herself in a realistic situation.
I’m not sure their design philosophy changed for the worse so much as they were restricted in implementing it due to the cost and time of producing graphic games. Death Gate’s development team must have spent too much time and resources in the earlier parts to have time to flesh out the later parts as well—Chelestra was obviously rushed, and the ending felt disappointing to me particularly the lack of elaboration on Xar’s motives. And I’m guessing the linear nature may have been the best they could handle at the time with expenses and deadlines. I guess Mr. Dahlgren’s ambitious ideas were greater than the practical limitations of the time, sadly.
Memory plays tricks like this. TimeQuest was among Bob’s first games, I wouldn’t expect him to remember every puzzle from a 30-year-old game, especially a complex one. Personally I thought it was a great idea, but then I tend to like puzzles other people hate, like monkey wrench from Monkey Island 2, or the cat hair mustache puzzle from Gabriel Knight 3. I agree on Death Gate though, Legend weren’t exactly top sellers, and producing 2-3 games for such a small team was probably too much. Also Dahlgren wasn’t much of a game designer at the time, it was his first solo project where he had to do everything, from art to writing to music.
————————————-
Speaking of Infocom, sad news are coming today. Mike Berlyn died aged 73. He produced a number of titles for Infocom (Suspended, Infidel, Cutthroats) as well as other adventures for other companies like Tass Times in Tonetown and Altered Destiny. He also made the last official text Zork for Activision in 1997 to promote Zork: Grand Inquisitor.
PC means personal computer
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
