Quick C64 benchmarks (stock ROMs, 1541, no REU)
Dialog .aastory w/aambundle 0.5.1 with ifste advent vs. Ozmoo v4 ZILF 0.9 advent.z3
Using first ten moves from the Dialog edition’s walkthrough:
Startup to prompt: 39 seconds
First ten moves: 80 seconds
Startup to prompt: 106 seconds
First twelve* moves: 51 seconds
* - The implementations are not identical. ZILF implementation prompts us for instructions, which Dialog does not, and this slight detour to answer “N” was counted as part of the “startup.” Also, ZILF does not support the auto-unlock and auto-open of the grate as Dialog version does, so UNLOCK GRATE and OPEN GRATE were added and the play was 12 moves compared to Dialog’s 10, so that both plays ended at picking up the wicker cage. Also, ZILF implementation does not display the “You walk south.”-style travel messages shown by Dialog.
Obviously we really feel the lack of any fastloading assistance in the Ozmoo build, resulting in a much longer startup time. (But another way to frame this would be to attempt to play on a sd2iec-class device. Ozmoo would perform fine-to-good and Dialog wouldn’t load at all.) Dialog gameplay performance wasn’t bad, although it is sometimes noticeable that words are being chunked out one-at-a-time from disk.