I’ve been thinking about it. Regarding puzzles, when was the last time you did anything other than unlock and open doors? How about a torch? What else do you do with it other than to use it as a light source and maybe burn things? Regarding the broom example, yes to all of those, just not all at once. Context sensitive action.
Maybe you want to see funny responses for EAT FIRE, or CUT HOLE INTO THE DOOR, but doing so only on some items makes the game feels incomplete. Having to write funny responses to all possible verbs, however, will require large amount of time, for basically niche players.
I think it really depends on the game. There will still be puzzles, for sure, but in a different form. Rather than traditional moon logic based puzzles, it will be more of resource management types.
Should I feed the dog the bone? Or cheeseburger? Should I eat the food now or wait until a better character comes along? What weapon do I want to take with me? The sword, the club, or the bow?
The gaming experience will be different, too. Rather than one pass, solving every puzzles once, you end up with playing the game multiple times, trying different strategies each time. I think this gaming style has merit.
I suppose I can note down different verbs to use with USE, but then to fully implement each verb separately will take tremendous amount of time. In the end, the game will either end up half baked, filled with boring stock responses, or worse, not finished at all. I just don’t think the audience is there. YMMV.
Should this game style be considered parser, rather than point and click? Well, there’s the rub. This is ParserComp, so I don’t know. Just because you type things in line input, doesn’t mean the puzzles aren’t PnC types. But that’s why I asked for your opinions. Thank you.