Because I dislike envisioning the protagonist of the story as a monosyllabic verbal cripple who can barely get out a coherent thought and can’t express anything that can’t be encapsulated in one or two words?
Because trying to control a conversation in IF line-by-line is like trying to masturbate wearing boxing gloves.
Because the IF interface manages to avoid modalities in all things except in conversation, where special TALK modes and TOPIC modes abound, modes where I can type the same exact thing as when I am not in that mode, and get entirely different results. This is a sign that the interface simply isn’t suited for the goal and has to be cloned-and-grafted to fit unnatural territory. Watching some parser games dissolve into numbered CYOA-style whenever conversation happens is another very strong sign that a bad graft has occurred.
Lastly and most importantly it’s because I don’t even need to choose words for the conversation in order to actually have and influence a conversation. I am barely kicking in any words anyway so what’s the point? A conversation is just a series of events that happen, nothing more, and there’s no reason it has to be more, so why go there into crap-interface territory? It just isn’t necessary. My character can be afraid and angry and curious and I never have to type ‘be afraid’ or ‘get angry’ or worse, ‘think about curiosity’ – why should conversation be any different? It should just happen.
A verb-object parser is just the wrong tool for this; in fact, since it is fundamentally predicated (NPI) on verb-object, IF in general is simply not well suited for simulating participatory dialogue – full-stop. This doesn’t mean it can’t depict conversations and even have their flow affected by the player: one thing has nothing to do with the other. I can’t decide which way to point my feet in IF, that would be tedious – but that doesn’t mean I can’t affect where I walk. A poor foot-simulator is not necessarily a poor walking-simulator. We just have to get less literal-minded about it to make it graceful.
I have never seen an actual graceful conversation system in IF that I can recall – I’ve seen some heroic attempts, but nothing ever nailed it. So I believe that we have to get way less literal-minded about adding interactivity to conversation, before we can get to the point where I don’t groan inwardly every single time a game takes me into conversation mode. It’s just a huge black mark on a game for me the moment it asks me to supply actual words into a conversation. I get bored out of my skull every time and I don’t mind admitting it – it’s not like I am an action movie guy either or have no patience for slice-of-life type stuff. Quite the opposite, so that’s not it, it’s just about bad interface. The fun part of being in a conversation is not the choosing of topic headings; the real fun is choosing your attitude and word order, so that isn’t captured at all in these systems, it’s just removed, leaving conversations a pale shadow of the liveliness they normally entail, and so conversations would be much better off without these ‘tools’. So the prevailing convention for this just doesn’t work and no tinkering it will fix it, the whole ASK/TELL ABOUT paradigm needs to be discarded completely, IMO, to be replaced with… nothing! Just a general philosophy that the graceful way to influence conversations in IF, is indirectly, or not at all.
This has been a solution in search of a problem, the entire time.
So, ‘Show don’t tell’, applied as a parser principle, to put it rather reductively. Anyone else feel the same about this? Does anyone else have that feeling of disappointment and trepidation every time any IF game wants me to tell it what specifically to talk about and what to ask about?
Paul.