>Also, what about the tools we use? What sorts of fundamental improvements
>could we make? I've considered modifying an interpreter so that I could
>edit the messages in my story file, then UNDO to see how it looks and
>sounds. (even if I made modifications to save the whole story file, I
>would still lose my interactive edits on the next compile) What about
>being able to edit CODE during test-play?
This can almost be done now--close enough, in fact, that it's not worth
rewiring the interpreter or compiler code. Most people are doing their
game development on a Mac or PC running MacOS or DOS (maybe Windows),
respectively. Moving your development to a Unix system offers the
following advantages:
* Speed. If you've got a Pentium Pro or a PowerMac 6 Kajillion, this is
not an issue. If you're stuck with something old, like most of us, it's a
major consideration. My TADS game, in its current state, takes about 40
seconds to compile on my 486/25, and about four seconds on the Unix shell
account I'm using (a decent machine, but hardly the latest and greatest).
* Programmer-friendliness. Using Emacs on the Unix box, I can hit two
keystrokes to start the code compiling, and keep editing while the
compilation proceeds (not that this is strictly necessary, for the
moment). If there are errors, one keystroke automatically parses the
output from the compiler and takes me to where the errors are. Another
keystroke suspends the editor and starts the game. With a playtesting
command, I can be in the proper place with the right objects in no time.
Emacs even has a "mode" for TADS code--it does the proper indenting
automatically. I can think about what I'm writing instead of making sure
my braces line up. (There may be an Inform mode, too--I don't know.)
The productivity gain from using a powerful editor on a powerful computer
offsets any speed lost by having to dial up over modem. If you happen to
be connected through a LAN, like I am, all the better.
If you read the group, you may very well have access to a Unix shell right
now and just never thought about using it for IF development before. I was
in that situation for months until one day it clicked. If you don't have a
shell account, you can get one cheap--probably $10-$20 per month.
The ultimate development platform is an X terminal. I'm lucky to go to
school within walking distance of an engineering college. They've got a
room full of X terms with 21-inch monitors. I can have the game running in
one window and be editing it in another, and have enough screen real estate
left over for a Netscape window.
Given what can be done easily and cheaply now, I find no compelling
justification for making tricky interpreter changes in order to test new
code. One thing I would like to see is separate-independent compilation
for TADS, but that's another rant.
In short: If you've got the means, try TADS or Inform on Unix.
>>There is nothing we can do about it. [The unsaleable state of IF]
>YIKES! That's a little stiff. How about some more thoughts from the
>peanut gallery before we live with a dictum like that?
I find myself caught somewhere in the middle on this. I agree with those
who say that no IF author today is going to release a game and strike it
rich, or even strike it middle-class. One the other hand, I do believe the
enormous group of people who read books, own computers, but don't play
games is a heretofore untapped audience that might help us usher in a new
era of IF for sale.
Probably not, though. And really, what's wrong with the way things are
now? Currently, enough games are being published to keep me busy. I'm
still working on Christminster, and would like to get to Shelby and PTF.
By the time I do, Lost New York and...uh, Avalon will probably be out. And
I'll be plugging away at my own game for a while yet.
Everyone writing games today is doing it because he loves to. This has
resulted in some great-quality games (the best in recent years, IMHO, being
Legend, by Dave Baggett, who claims he doesn't even particularly care
whether people play his games) as well as an exciting IF culture here on
the group. I'm having fun writing my adventure, and I certainly hope it
gets played and lauded or panned. I don't give a damn whether anyone sends
me any money for it, or whether a thousand people solve it. I'd love to
hear commentary on it from Gareth Rees, Andrew Plotkin, Dave Baggett, and
everyone else who makes r.a.i-f the best place on Usenet to hang out.
(Having said that, don't hold your breath--it'll be a while before I'm
done, and hey, then it'll probably be time to start readying a competition
entry.)
So how, I wonder, would another "Golden Age of [Commercial] IF" make for
more personal enjoyment for most of us?
Okay, it's time to put my laundry in the dryer. If you've gotten this far,
bless you.
Matthew