There’s textual setting. You have to make it clear what you are promoting to people. Text adventures may imply that but then the setting really demands good writing skills to make it feel like an actual setting, rather than just a bunch of text. So “play this game because the settings are described really well, and the writing is quite atmospheric” would be something enticing. “There’s a setting.” would probably not.
Humor is a good one.
“Not getting stuck” totally depends, of course. I’ve seen many people get stuck on text adventures because they missed reading one bit of text that they didn’t know had changed (since it only changed after one event and it wasn’t clear what had changed). I’ve seen people get “stuck” in the sense of having to sit and examine everything in their inventory to remember what the bit of text was about it and then try “use {thing} with {thing}” or lots navigating to read a bunch of text to see if they missed an exit or something.
Visuals, sounds … I’m not sure. I don’t see much effort on authors to really utilize all senses when authoring text games. There are some exceptions, granted. And if people want visuals and sounds, going to a text-based game is often not going to be what they think of, any more than they would go to a book when they really wanted a movie.
And how has that worked for text adventures lately? Seriously: people have lots of ways to spend their time and they may like lots of things. That argument can apply to anything. Try skiing. You may like it. Try basketball. You may like it. Try World of Warcraft. You may like it. But when there are lots of choices, making options compelling may require slightly more thought. Again, you may not need this since you’re already interested in text games. If this is the best people can do, I can see why text games have never really taken off again even though, in many ways, I can see lots of potential for text-based game worlds.
Going back to what I said before: “setting really demands good writing skills to make it feel like an actual setting, rather than just a bunch of text.” I think that’s one value add that text games could potentially bring as a value add: good writing. (Some people tout Mass Effect’s story and thus writing as really good. I actually don’t think it’s all that great, to be honest. I mean, it’s okay – but it’s a story that’s been done to death. It’s the combination of other gaming elements that makes it workable.) But let’s face it, beyond a pure puzzle-fest, a text-based game pretty much has to have solid writing because it lives and dies by the text that it presents. If that text is boring, confusing, etc., then people won’t be able to tell if they like the experience of text games because they’ll equate the experience with bad or shallow writing.
I guess I’m probably asking two questions in this thread as I think on it. One is “How would you present a compelling case for text adventures?” and “Why is the level of interactivity often touted as the key determinant of text adventures when it seems there is less interactivity than other game formats?”