IF Criticism (or, Review of Review: The Light...)

[sgranade@itchy.phy.duke.edu (Stephen Granade)]

A few comments on recent postings:

I believe that, in our race to make interactive fiction a "serious" art  
form, we have begun to lose sight of the gaming aspect of IF.  IF can  
function as a game, as a story, or as both.  Granted, succeeding as  
fiction and as game is preferred, but the lack of one does not of  
necessity cripple the other.

"A Change in the Weather" was one of the best-written pieces of IF I have  
ever played.  However, it utterly failed as a game for me: I did not enjoy  
its puzzle(s), and in fact could not complete it until after the  
competition, and then only with the aid of a walkthrough.  "The Light:  
Shelby's Addendum" is fulfilling an opposite role for me; I am enjoying it  
as a game, but do not feel that it is greatly written fiction.

It's good that we as a community are focusing on the literary aspects of  
IF, trying to broaden it in that direction.  The recent thread on  
puzzleless IF is a wonderful step in that direction.  The pendulum may  
have swung too far, though.  We may be in danger of discounting new IF  
unless it aims to be more than entertainment.

There is amazing pressure on authors now.  Unless games break new ground  
technically and are artistically wonderful, we seem to look down on them.   
"Oh," we say, "another pointless puzzle-driven game.  Too bad they didn't  
focus on writing and plot construction to the exclusion of all else."

Gareth, to me your review of "Shelby" typifies this view.  I didn't  
recognize the game you reviewed as the one I'm playing.  You make many  
valid points, but in the end try to force it to fit your conception of how  
IF should be.  Why is it that "Shelby" is poor because "it would not have  
been out of place had it appeared as a mid-period Infocom game"?  Are such  
mid-period Infocom games such as "Hitchhiker's Guide" and "Infidel" now  
poor examples of IF, not worth producing today?  And I felt that your  
remark "I wouldn't actually advise against playing [it]..." was needlessly  
snide and condescending.

You can enjoy the works of Arthur Miller and Sam Shepard and still  
appreciate the entertainment of a play by Christopher Durang.  There is  
nothing wrong with IF as entertainment, and entertaining IF in no way  
prevents us from writing more literary IF.  As in everything, balance is  
needed.  A steady diet of either style would quickly grow bland.

IF is not a single road down which we must march lock-step, trampling  
underfoot any work which does not "advance the genre."  Rather, it is a  
branching path with many directions we may travel.  IF is big enough to  
encompass works from "Jigsaw" and "The Legend Lives!" to "John's Fire  
Witch" and "Shelby's Addendum."

--
  Stephen Granade                  | "You fools!  Money doesn't put fish
  sgranade@phy.duke.edu            |  on the table!  FISH puts fish on
  Duke University, Physics Dept    |  the table!"
                                   |    -- Mr. Smartypants, from The Tick