I’m pretty sure that a bunch of people were outraged when Infocom began to branch out from the Zork line, too.
OW! So much has happened while I was writing my nonsense.
To add: Emily, I was joking (that’s why I added the smiley). I never said I disrespect Twine or whatever. If what I expressed (the fear of news, I guess) is old stuff, I’m sorry for the repetita. I wasn’t here when such things happened.
What i don’t get is why it’s not safe to say “I don’t like this format” while it’s safe to say “i don’t like you not liking this format”. I didn’t say - I want to stress this out - “go away you twine people”. I will NEVER auto-1 a game because of format. I just said “I’m sad is parser goes”. Next year we can well have 10.000 twine games and 1 parser and I’d still be happy.
Also: I didn’t say what’s written in Twine is stupid. I’m frankly fed up of people putting words in my mouth. Now it’s YOU, not me, being inhospitable (to whatever the fuck you spell it). I just said that - as in everywhere else - mass brings less quality. This is a FACT. Everywhere. in games, in sports, in pigeon shit. I’m pretty sure Twine authors can be Mark Twain.
Also: why Twine? Nobody out to defend ChoiceofGames? Or the custom-web-based? This looks like a war between Twine and the world. I’m not into it.
For closing: Zarf, I agree on everything you said. Though, we are not “The crowd that fears and hates all IF except its own dying style”, so you can sleep safe.
Healy has got it right in the first place: just relax. Me, for myself, and I’m not talking on behalf of anybody else, just said I’m sad if parser goes. Which will eventually happen in 13 years, according to zarf’s predictions. And that’s fucking all. Don’t build a flamewar on every frigging shit one guy writes in a post, for god’s sake. And stop converting EVERY GODDAMN SENTENCE into a male-vs-something thread. This is becoming ridiculous VERY FAST. If 1-voting has now become sexist, we are running towards insanity pretty fast.
I remember that one movie about the one kid who got 14 presents and complained and had a terrible holiday because his sister got more. That was a funny movie!
It would’ve been funny if she’d gotten 20. But she got 21, and that was just way too cruel on the poor kid.
Ok, I’m outta this. Just a reminder:
Somebody posted a thread because “IF was dead”. This was my answer to that post. That’s the only relevant thing I had to say.
I meant to defend CYOAS, not attack them. Now you can go on having fun of me and calling me names.
Nite-nite.
PS: opinions are all worthy, and none should be condemned too lightly, although some can be argued against. Respect, though, is something that should be given essentially to anyone. “Poor kid” my fucking ass.
You should probably look up the definition of misogyny before you try turning everything into a “everyone hates women” comment.
So my hyperbolic subject line started this whole thing. I’m simply disappointed that the annual IF Competition now has more games that don’t use the medium created by the authors of ADVENT than those that do. I like playing text adventures. I’ve never written one, but I hope to someday. I’m not interested in playing CYOA games. That’s not the same thing as throwing any of the insults in their direction that have been mentioned in this thread. It’s also not misogynistic. I lack both knowledge and assumptions of who wrote any of those games. This comp was started to encourage the creation of works in a medium that is now the minority in the comp. I still like the old medium.
No, but I wasn’t specifically addressing you, except with my comment about comp-entering. Opinions expressed in this thread did include the idea that the comp should be made exclusive to parser games, that parser games suit a more intelligent audience than choice-based games, and that choice-based games should be automatically be given 1s. Those sentiments go beyond “I don’t like playing choice-based games” (a personal preference I don’t feel any right or need to argue with) and instead suggest a strategy of exclusive behavior and imply that there is a community norm that prefers parser-format stuff.
That is what I wanted to say something about, not only to respond to the people who were saying those things but also to provide a counterbalance for choice-game authors who might be reading all this and thinking “…@#!, no one here is interested in what I’m doing.”
That sounds good–it’s tricky to learn how to build a game. There are ways to support that, whether via helping test a game, helping test a comp (like ShuffleComp) or even providing transcripts (annotated or not) for authors with parser games, whether for IFComp, Spring Thing, IntroComp or others. All these things are greatly appreciated, and the last is a strength of parser games that Twine doesn’t fully have. You can visit ClubFloyd to participate in a game playing session, or write a review.
I suspect many who want to help keep parser games alive don’t know about these options. They’re worthwhile, and fun, and forward looking and noncontroversial.
Oh, and Marco, I forgot to use sarcasm font. I can’t imagine Hanon’s movie exists except as base satire.
I think zarf’s point is that if people keep up the IF-is-dying-woe-is-me talk, it’ll end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy and NOBODY will want to make parser games. And now I see that you’re talking about that post zarf made which showed we had one less parser game than last year, which I don’t think was made to illustrate any sort of downward trend.
Also, I don’t think 1-voting is necessarily sexist so much as it is discriminatory, which is not the same thing. I think there are a lot of nice writers, both male and female, who work in choice-based idioms, and I think it would be a shame to throw the lot of them out.
Arrgh, James left the thread while I was writing this, so I’m guessing he can’t see this. Well, I’ll post it anyway; it’s a nice post, I think.
Threads like this are precisely why I don’t hang around here.
1 Like
Ok. And sorry: my “you being inhospitable” was plurally ambiguous too. I need to install that extension, sooner or later.
And yes, some of the things were stated formally, and I don’t know why I thought everything said was addressed to me. It was - maybe - the aggro that drove me nuts. And the recurring element of having, anyway, people put words in my mouth. Or beliefs in my heart.
Sorry.
You forgot twice, it seems.
Of course I was joking.
IF stands for “interactive fiction.” I haven’t played any of the comp entries, but I suspect that they are all fictional and that you can interact with them. (As for the “authors of ADVENT” bit, why not see what they actually had to say about their process? Will Crowther: “My idea was that it would be a computer game that would not be intimidating to non-computer people.”)
As for the “misogynistic” part I don’t think it’s a huge stretch to note the context – specifically, a great deal of participation and even mainstream media coverage noticing an influx of female authors and designers who work primarily, but not exclusively, in Twine – and then note the concurrent, directed backlash. The reason no one is mentioning Choice Of or Quest or whatever is because no one here is targeting them. (Well, maybe also because the rules prohibit commercial IF, but the backlash is not confined to this thread.)
1 Like
That’s really unfair. I don’t know anything about what design system(s) all the “Web” labelled games were written in, or who wrote them. I certainly don’t know anything about this “mainstream media coverage”. I went down the list on the comp website looking for games in formats supported by Gargoyle, and found 13. That was the source of information in my original post. Personally, my “backlash” is against the dearth of parser games in the annual event that was created for them.
That’s how I view it, and I’m excited about this year’s comp. This is despite me taking some time in past years to adjust to the increasing presence of web-based CYOA-style games/IF. Yes I’m old fashioned - I’ve been judging in this comp for 20 years now and playing IF for nearer 35 
- and prefer parser games. That’s my personal preference. But I still view Twine etc. games as interactive fiction, and will happily “play” them and judge, though I tend to approach them a bit differently, expecting a rather different interactive experience, not least from a user interface perspective, but still potentially a highly rewarding one.
So that’s my view. IF = interactive fiction, which can be parser based, or CYOA/web style, or goodness only knows what else. I’d be very disappointed if potential authors of any of these were deterred by reading negative views. And the thought of people automatically voting 1 for one type, just based on its type, appalls me.
On the first part, you’re right, 1-voting is disrespectful, disgraceful, and if the games aren’t that bad, dishonest. The reason I put the web-based games in their own directory was for a sense of proportion in that if a game were good enough to vote on it would be rated accordingly and if not, simply refraining from the vote. It’s an attempt to recognize my biases for what they are and to not behave unkindly. I’m willing to bet that a lot of other parser fans have similar intentions in mind. No misogyny, or even chivalry, intended.
Asking someone to “look up the definition” of something they are telling you they’re experiencing is not only incredibly rude, it’s also belittling, silencing, and exactly the kind of behavior that many, many people in the past few years have told me makes the IF community something they don’t want to be part of or participate in.
Come on, David. You’re better than that.
For anyone reading this thread, there are many people here who welcome all kinds of people doing cool things with interactive text, including myself. Keep making what you’re making, and keep sharing it with us all.
1 Like
Thank you, Emily. If this were an open letter I’d sign it.
Everyone, but especially David Whyld, MTW, Jamespking: please be kind and respectful when stating your opinions. The first two pages of this thread in particular are not at all friendly or welcoming.
2 Likes