Message-ID: <3AC1F6C5.774C8380@csi.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 09:35:49 -0500
From: John Colagioia <JColagioia@csi.com>
Organization: No Conspiracy Here...
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,fr,ru,es,it,ga,de,ja,gd,eu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Subject: Re: Games being forgotten (was: Nelson and Forman (was Re: Inform -
 GamePreRoutine))
References: <zCs2IIA+pnt6Ewvl@ntlworld1.com> <Pine.GSO.4.33.0103260819340.14495-100000@ucsu.colorado.edu> <99nqcb$q15$1@news.lth.se> <3abff067.253285897@news.newsguy.com> <99r0ia$lbt$1@news.lth.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.34.37.104
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.34.37.104
X-Trace: excalibur.gbmtech.net 985789833 208.34.37.104 (28 Mar 2001 09:30:33 EST)
Lines: 76
X-Authenticated-User: jnc
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.esat.net!do.de.uu.net!ams.uu.net!nyc.uu.net!excalibur.gbmtech.net
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:84676

Magnus Olsson wrote:

> So what do I want to see happening? I don't really want games to be
> "continually and repeatedly reviewed". That would be overkill. I want
> them to be discussed. What's the difference? Well, consider static
> fiction. People don't continually review the classics; if the classics
> are reviewed, it's because someone has done something new with
> them - either a new interpretation (of a performed work, such as
> _Hamlet_), or a new translation, or somebody has found a new angle on
> how to use the _Decameron_ to illuminate Rennaisance Italy, or
> whatever.
> But the classics are always discussed, used as references, alluded to.

Well, first, I should point out that in the short time I've been reading,
here, I've seen quite a few games consistently referenced:
- Spider and Web
- Galatea
- Shade
- So Far
- Anchorhead
....which, I'll grant you, are mostly by a particular person (and, oddly,
clustered around a particular letter, as well), which might have a mild
effect, but let's skip that point.  My point is that these are mentioned
quite often--just not in the "this reminds me of the X in Y" sense that
literary classics are often used.

....And that brings me to my other point:  Comments like that--which are
often in the context of "reviewing" or otherwise discussing another
game--are easily misconstrued as calling the game-of-topic derivative or
cliche.  Consider, for example, if, in discussing some brand-new game
someone comments that, "Auntie Mae seems quite a bit like Planetfall's
Floyd," the writer of the game might feel it was meant as an insult.

And, despite what people have mentioned, the atmosphere here is still fairly
friendly, and I would imagine people refrain from these sorts of comments in
hopes of not hurting feelings.


> Now, this may sound incredibly pompous - do I really mean that works
> of IF should become cultural icons like _Hamlet_? Not really, but I'm
> saying that good pieces of IF should stay in people's attention.
>
> And we do actually _have_ classics in the IF field: most of Infocom's
> games, for example, and ADVENT, of course, and _Curses_. But there
> seems to be a boundary somewhere after that, after which it's at least
> become very hard to achieve the status of classic.

Consider, however, the number of games from the same period (Level 9, Scott
Adams, Magnetic Scrolls, etc., etc.) that are not "classics."

It's kind of like saying that "all that old Greek and Latin stuff is so
good--why aren't modern writers that consistent."  The answer is that they
are, but only the best literature from the ancient world survived.


> Today, it seems, a
> new work of IF can be hailed as seminal, ground-breaking, the best
> since sliced bread - and then totally fade from the discussion after
> just a couple of months. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

Which goes to show, in my opinion, just how hard it is to write a game that
affects people enough to keep it fresh in their minds.


> Oh, and on a less pretentious note, speaking as a fan: I think it
> would be a pity if the good games released today won't be played and
> enjoyed in the future.

Well, I'm probably not alone in this, but one of the first thing I do when I
"claim" a computer is to install a Z-Machine interpreter and pull in my
favorite dozen or two games, which I'll occasionally go back to play with,
or suggest to other people when the discussion turns to games.  Assuming I'm
not some sort of insane mutant or anything, I suspect that there's no danger
of the better games fading from sight, just like the Infocom games haven't.


