Who are you imagining would do this? Are you proposing coding it yourself? Asking someone else to code it?
2 Likes
Me, yes, and certainly not; in that order.
I wouldn’t have proposed it if I wasn’t willing to make the attempt myself.
Getting some feedback on the idea before I start coding as opposed to backtracking after the fact seemed wise.
I’m not super clear on the intent behind your question, so in the off chance you simply wanted to borrow/adapt the idea, go for it. Nothing wrong with a similar idea being executed two different ways. Besides, I’m not Disney; if I wanted to keep the idea all to myself, I wouldn’t have posted it on a public forum, lol.
2 Likes
From time to time, folks show up here on the forum with wishful ideas for IF platforms, hoping that someone else will code them. If that were the case, I just wanted to encourage you to try coding it yourself.
In practice, might I specifically recommend porting Bronze to your new thing? https://ifdb.org/viewgame?id=9p8kh3im2j9h2881 Bronze was originally designed with some “teach the newbie” features built in, and its source is available under a Creative Commons license, so you should in principle be able to take the code, add in Vorple buttons, and try it out with real IF newbies to see if it helps/works.
(A common problem for folks implementing a new thing is that you not only have to code the new thing, there has to be a good game underneath; often, these are, ah, separate skillsets.)
Also be sure to check out Blue Lacuna, if you haven’t already. It has my favorite newbie tutorial of any parser game I know; I like it better than The Dreamhold, which was designed specifically for educating newbies.
3 Likes
I think you were simply voicing your concerns. They are valid concerns and should be brought up in a conversation like this. Even if I already agree with you, another reading this post may have not yet encountered those viewpoints. Thank you; I hope they actually help, lol.
I’m familiar with the history. It’s a common reoccurring topic on ifMUD. I believe a community can be inclusive and also celebrate the things that make them unique at the same time. There are some fantastic Twine games that I would readily recommend to nearly anyone. At the same time, there are things that parsers do that a hyperlink-based game simply cannot.
…adds to endless ‘need-to-play’ list…
Agreed, it isn’t for everyone. Choice and Point & Click games certainly have their strengths.
Honestly, the gateway comment was a joke reference to the DARE program of my youth. It wasn’t the wisest choice of words in retrospect, but I believe you understand my intent now.
Of course, I’m glad that’s the case. Thanks for sharing the poster! 
2 Likes
The Adventure Literacy Project (TALP) and the associated game jams try to do something similar by encouraging authors to include a tutorial to “text adventures” as part of the game.
Adventuron, a system by the TALP co-ordinator, is quite an interesting authoring tool as it has support for both choice and parser-based input, as well as the ability for players to click on commands/auto-complete. It might be worth you looking into.
4 Likes
I can see how that would be problematic. I’ve witnessed similar phenomenon in other creative endeavors. People asking photographers to photograph their event for free for the “exposure” or graphic artists being either lowballed or stiffed for custom work, etc, etc. This is a less exploitative example, more-so wishful thinking on the part of the hypothetical poster, but I can certainly see your point.
Point taken. I had forgotten that Bronze’s CC license allowed me to do this. This would be a great place to start as a proof of concept and would be a great community resource in and of itself. It would also let me play-test the concept and work out some of the kinks.
Honestly, I’d still like to make a custom build eventually. Something purpose-built is often better at that purpose than something adapted to that purpose after it was built.
Agreed wholeheartedly. You should see my code. Half of the written text is simply personal notes signposting what each bit of code is, what it does, and why I have it there. Past Pinkunz constantly handholding future Pinkunz attempting to decipher what he had written and why. Coding is not one of my native skills, but I can brute force it with enough patience and organization. Thankfully, I rarely make the same mistake twice. Disturbingly, there appears to be an endless list of new mistakes to make, lol.
Thanks for the suggestions. Both dutifully added to my endless list, although with higher priorities given their relevance to these efforts.
1 Like
I am a huge fan of the Text Adventure Literacy Project and have already joined this year’s Jam.
As for Mr. Ainsley’s Adventuron Engine, I find it to be an impressive system with even more impressive active support and constant beta effort for new features on its Discord.
Coding is my chokepoint. It took me a few years to gain enough comfort with Inform to feel confident enough to release a game publicly. Adventuron will take me some time to pick up. For the time being, Vorple will have to suffice.
Thank you very kindly for the suggestion though.
I think if your goal is to teach people how to play a parser game you should stick to using the parser. A couple reasons for this.
- if you’re trying to teach people parser you don’t want to also have to teach them how to use buttons, thats just time detracted from teaching them the thing you set out to teach them.
- similarly it may be confusing for players switching between the systems.
- If you are designing a tutorial, whether as part of a game or as a game itself the tutorial design should lend itself to the design of the game which includes if it’s parser or buttons. If you design your tutorials around buttons, and having to design tutorials for both buttons and parser requires two different design approaches, mainly because of what information is already available to the player, but you may also want to communicate that information differently. So having two different systems means your going to have to work in two different designs, again making things more complicated for you and the player.
As for the idea of a tutorial game though, it does sound interesting, I’d definitely give it a play. Personally I think it’d be a lot nicer to see more games tackle tutorial design in their game design besides just info dumping how to play or making verbs visible. I’ve shared in another thread as well this GDC talk on tutorial design, I think it has a lot of great ideas included in it, and hopefully it can help your project. The main thing I took away is a lot more tutorials should follow the rule of show don’t tell. The speaker talks about this a bit in the part on Half Life where they talk about how the player is introduced to the enemies, and weapons through environmental design, not some pop-up or other info dump. An example of this I think would work well in a parser game would just be showing other characters picking things up, or moving to the other room in order to teach someone how to TAKE or GO. (mainly in this case the reported text should aid the player in knowing what verb the NPC is using such as “You see NPC goes north” or “you see NPC take the item”)
I’d definitely be interested in hearing more about what all you hope to teach the player in terms of verbs or general game play.
1 Like
In a nutshell, I’m pondering if buttons for navigation and simple commands could be introduced in the beginning orientation, and then slowly eliminated as the game explained how each was more flexible (and attributable towards specific NPCs and objects) as a parser entry.
Personally, I would not take things away from the player in that way. Even though replacing the buttons with text commands is technically broadening what the player can do, there is not really any reward for the player.
Instead I would make it a choice on the part of the player. For example, give the player room for 3-5 action buttons. Then the player could “memorize” certain actions to remove those buttons, thereby making room for new action buttons. This means the system would work at their convenience.
Then again this approach would be significantly different from standard IF and might not work as a tutorial.
2 Likes
Hello Gwen, thank you for your response. I understand your points and if it were only parser input being taught, I’d be tempted to take that approach. However, there are really at least two things being taught here: the world model typical to text adventures & parser games, and the actual parser interaction with that world model. Allowing the player to intuitively explore that world model and discover how items, rooms, scenery, inventory, and NPCs all interact and function allows for that to be grasped separately before tackling the parser itself.
Let me quote @robinjohnson from a different topic, because he elucidates this point quite well:
I grant that starting with buttons first takes more time and potentially adds more complexity and possible points for confusion, but there is one more thing I’m trying to demonstrate to the player, and that is the intrinsic limitation of a button interface. Starting with a button interface and successfully interacting with the (simple) world model only to run into more complex situations that can’t be handled with that interface demonstrates a solid Why for the parser. More importantly, this demonstration takes place after the player has already invested into the gameplay and not prior to playing. This is opposed to trying to tell the player why they should play a text input game (ironically using a wall of text) before actually developing any interest in the premise, setting, or characters of your game. For many players, this is a big ask when we already run at a deficit of patience from casual gamers.
Agreed, either of those methods would be inadequate for many prospective players.
That is an excellent tutorial suggestion (as well as a great narrative hook, Alice does indeed follow the rabbit) and you can consider it safely swiped. * swoosh *
When an author writes a book, they don’t typically write for an audience, but instead write for an individual or, at most, a few specific people that they perceive (right or wrong) as representative of their overall audience. In that way, to be entirely transparent, the archetypal individual I perceive this game being written for is my wife. Her interactive fiction experiences thus far only include a single scarring episode at roughly twelve of being sat down in front of Infocom’s The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy with absolutely no guidance or explanation (not a forgiving game even for the parser fluent). Her last positive videogame experience was in the early 90’s playing Capcom’s Yo! Noid for the original Nintendo. Opening the game to a blinking cursor, no matter how friendly the interface, or being prompted to read a written FAQ before the game begins would be a non-starter for her. She’s certainly not stupid, quite the contrary, in fact. She is very smart and a voracious reader, vacuuming up novel-length fiction in particular. She often laments that authors don’t keep internal consistency for their character’s actions in light of their motivations. I see her very much enjoying (hypothetically) something in the vein of a modern Plundered Hearts, or Violet, or even Alabaster…
…if I could get her to play it long enough to get interested.
This is all to say, that there are three separate things I’m trying to impart to my wife and others like her:
- Fluency and possible interest in the world model system of stereotypical interactive fiction.
- Familiarity and basic fluency with a text parser input and the sorts of things this interface allows one to do beyond a button interface.
- Why a text-based game, and Interactive Fiction in general, may be worth further exploration on their part.
The first and second points are really only crutches to getting to the aspirational third goal.
Hello, thanks for your response.
That’s a valid point. Some sort of reward for mastering a parser input would be a good idea, although I’ll have to stew on what would be appropriate.
This is an interesting idea and could certainly be workable. I’d have to chew on how best to present the button limitation to the player, but it would be less obtrusive than actually removing the button on behalf of the player. Interestingly, you could make new command functionality dependent on having an open button slot:
You could probably jump across that chasm, if only you had an available action slot. Maybe there’s another way to look, take, drop, talk, or open?
…* glowing button labeled “show me how” appears *…
Or something of the like. It is a less obtrusive way of incentivizing the player to learn the corresponding parser commands. I might swipe some version of this… * swoosh *
Yet to be seen, right? Thank you again for your comments.
Apparently Infocom did release a tutorial demo? Apparently it was originally released in a “four in one” sampler.
In my head, I’m thinking of a parser game that includes a sidebar with text explaining what’s happening and suggesting actions. I don’t know if I’ve imagined it, but I’m almost sure I’ve played an Infocom that had tutorial text in italics, and it nagged you until you turned it off. I may be misremembering.
2 Likes
I’m embarassed that I did not think of this. I may go try the tutorial again, as it’s been a long time. The files are at Zarf’s OCIC
2 Likes
They also need to learn how to win a puzzle adventure game. Objects will be hidden; those objects will grant access to new areas; objects can sometimes be combined or reimagined to solve puzzles, etc.
Even newbies who enjoy sudoko/crossword puzzles for their own sake can be stumped by the cultural norms of “adventure” games (even point-and-click adventures).
2 Likes
Not bad. I didn’t experiment much, so there is probably more tutorial text available. It is funny that the tutorial game overs you if you make a mistake near the end. It’s so on-brand
There’s some oddness because I use the Frotz-native undo to show the success and failure endings.
1 Like
I’m not sure if anyone has done it yet. In a way it might be closer to some graphical adventure games that rely heavily on items rather than actions.
1 Like
I’d like to note, in regards to the tutorial talk going on right now, that I haven’t abandoned this effort. I just suck at Vorple. I have wasted numerous evenings just trying to get buttons to work in Inform7, and I must admit I bit off more than I realized at the time.
I do not find the application of vorple intuitive in any sense whatsoever, but that probably says more about me than vorple.
Anyway, while I’m still struggling with this, and in the spirit of ongoing tutorial discussions, if anyone has any additional feedback about this effort, I’m definitely all ears.
5 Likes
For “button based IF”, I’m always reminded of Mickey’s Space Adventure, and it’s older game Troll Tales. Have you seen them? They’re on YouTube.
I especially like Mickey’s Space Adventure game.
2 Likes
I’m not familiar with either, but I’ll look into both and get back to you. Thanks for tip!
2 Likes