Its been quite some years since I last played around with Inform, and I was wondering if Inform has seen any improvements in accessibility or usability? I find the language to be really enjoyable to code in, but am also a little saddened by how hard it is to show off your stories given the huge/massive ask you place on the reader/user/player. For this, I have some questions:
Has there been any developments in making stories be capable of being compiled/released into single executables? As it was before(and from what I can gather), then the user still has to overcome the massive archaic challenge of installing and running interpreters like glulx or similar.
Has there been any improvements in making it easier to manipulate windows/hyperlinks? I remember the old-fashioned Flexible Windows extensions and Inline Hyperlinks (but it seems like extensions like Inline Hyperlinks still has to be manually installed).
Are there any plans to make Inform more user friendly in the future? In terms of Interface and so on?
I looked at some of the Narrascope talks, and it seems like some thoughts have been gone into porting Inform 7 to Unity/Unreal. Are there any updates to that?
Nearly all of the past eight years (since release 6M62) have been taken up by an under-the-hood rewrite and open source release of Inform. So very little has changed from the authoring point of view. We’re just now getting to the point where new front-line features are being discussed and implemented.
No. The easily-approachable form of an Inform game is a web page, not an executable. (“Release along with an interpreter.”) This release format was available last time you checked in, though, so it’s not a change.
The extensions you mention have evolved a bit under the hood but they still work about the same way.
I think we’re moving towards standardizing on my Uniform Glulx Input extension, which should make hyperlinks simpler to deal with directly. I suspect most people will still use something like Inline Hyperlinks.
What would you like you see different about the interface?
This is still pure speculation.
There’s an experimental framework for compiling an Inform game into C code (which could then be compiled into some existing game framework). But this is not integrated with anything; it’s a proof-of-concept.
I am aware it was possible. But, say, for an example now that I am trying to get back into it and trying to make sense of everything. Its not exactly easy to even figure out whats up and down with glulxe interpreters. I remember using Gargoyle, but really, In this case I’m trying to argue for the average user/author. I dont really even know where to get an interpreter now, since the main Glulxe interpreter site is not very easy to navigate.
I still dont understand why one couldn’t just make a pick for a main interpreter and then include that for Inform projects when they’re released and then still have the option to pick other interpreters.
I dont understand why things like Inline Hyperlinks/Flexible Windows and similar isn’t just part of the source code:
Being able to easily include something like a tab that has “suggestions” for commands to be input that you can click on to boost the user-friendly aspect of Inform.
The ability to easily include images and partition the interface into multiple sections. So that you can create something like a sidetab to the left similar to Twine for an example, or Quest Soft Player.
In truth, the only reason this was interesting to me would be the prospect of cutting out the need to hassle with interpreters and potentially making Inform easier to work with, whilst also making your stories easier to access for potential readers.
I had a play with the new I7 to C++ output. It was most interesting, and something I’d like to see developed further. Right now it is indeed experimental. Unfortunately the code output is huge. However, as a first version it was most encouraging. Obviously I7 → C++ → code needs no interpreter and can be deployed with no dependencies.
I dont understand why things like Inline Hyperlinks/Flexible Windows and similar isn’t just part of the source code.
Being able to easily include something like a tab that has “suggestions” for commands to be input that you can click on to boost the user-friendly aspect of Inform.
The ability to easily include images and partition the interface into multiple sections.
Yes indeed. I’m with you on all these points. Amazingly these are all an uphill struggle with Inform. Things you’d expect to be a done deal by now.
The second point you mention, ie “suggestions”, is an important feature people aren’t currently talking about. I call this “elevate to choice”. This is when a command is so obvious or so common that it is presented as a choice simply as a convenience to the player. And why not.
I’m not sure which site you mean, but IFWiki now maintains a database of interpreters. Here’s a page of Glulx interpreters, for example: Glulx interpreters - IFWiki
I suspect new players who find a game on IFDB might find it easier to just use the “Play Online” button on the IFDB page, though.
Well, they sort of do. It’s just the one they’ve chosen makes a playable web page rather than an EXE, but that means it’s far more portable (basically every device has a web browser these days). It’s also a lot easier to convince someone to open a page where they can play the game in their browser (like with Twine) than to run an untrusted EXE.
Also, if it was a downloadable .EXE, you’d have to include a downloadable Mac app and a downloadable Linux app too. I mean you wouldn’t have to, but we’d strongly encourage it because why leave people out? The playable web page winds up being easier for the author and the player.
Also the absolute largest advantage of decoupling the game from the interpreter is that you can trust the interpreter to cater to all the preferences of the player, allowing the author to just focus on the game.
This was also why I had fallen in love with modding (GZ)Doom, before switching to making games with Unity3D (the former using a game-interpreter system, and the latter compiling standalone .exe files). While Unity3D was powerful, I really missed the decoupled aspects of Doom.
When I jumped into parser IF, I was ecstatic to know that games ran in an interpreter, and did not run as standalone, executable programs.
Also, I think IFDB provides the “play online” button automatically, even if you don’t release your game as a web page. I think all you need is a gblorb, and IFDB can set it up to be played with an online interpreter.
And the IF Archive would be filled with games bundled with outdated interpreters for operating systems that hardly anyone uses any more. Which I guess isn’t too bad as long as you can extract the data files (myself, I draw the line at binhexed self-extracting StuffIt archives), but still not very helpful either.