From: goetz@acsu.buffalo.edu (Phil Goetz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Subject: {Re: Re: Adv. generators}, Puzzles & Pulp IF
Date: 11 Nov 92 22:49:43 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci

I. REPLY:

In article <3150113@hpsemc.cup.hp.com> dag@hpsemc.cup.hp.com (David A Graves) writes:
>
>Morpheus Nosferatu asked:
>
>> Has anyone ever worked on, or even heard of, an adventure generator?
>
>Phil Goetz replied:
>
>> The generator you speak of is not written, not being written, and not
>> anywhere on the horizon.  In 50 years, maybe.  In 20, definitely not.
>
>I think Phil forgot to add the phrase "In my opinion".  I hate to see anyone
>squash enthusiasm for pursuing the goals of automating personality or 
>automating plot synthesis, stating their opinions as fact.

OK, you're right, "in my opinion".

>My first adventure game generator was completed in 1981.  It was the
>initialization module for a multi-user, realtime, text adventure game called
>"Quest".  The layout of the adventure was different every time; descriptions
>varied, computer controlled characters varied, and the goal of the players
>(the quest) varied.  The generator selected location, character, and object
>descriptions from a large library of colorful text, giving it a feeling of
>being "authored" rather than "computer generated".  The puzzles were not as
>complex as those seen in InfoCom games, but the element of multiple
>intelligent players added complexity, and therefore increased the challenge
>and fun.  Up to twenty players would enter the adventure, each of us in our
>own office, so that contact between players was through the computer interface
>only.  It was tremendous fun, and much of my work in IF over the years has
>been an attempt to capture that excitment in a single-user IF environment.

...

>Synthesis of character behavior and plot twists need not
>rely on the computer being creative.  Rather, we need only create a good
>library of plot and character elements, and devise good algorithms for
>assembling them.  I'm not trying to solve the old problems of computer
>intelligence; I'm working on methods for good illusions.

The original question said something like "adventures comparable to Infocom's."
Infocom's adventures are creative; each one occupies a different world, with a
different atmosphere, different history, etc.  The little jokes dispersed
throughout, the scenario, the scenery, AND most importantly (in this case)
the puzzles, all require creativity FAR FAR FAR beyond anything I can
envisage a library of plot and character elements coming up with.
Simple object puzzles involving compositionality and the use of instruments
may be generated automatically.  Many Scott Adams adventures could perhaps
someday soon be computer-generated; they typically involve figuring out how
physically to get object A to where it is needed.  But the better class of
puzzles (IMHO) (e.g. the Hitchhiker's Guide puzzle where you have to note that
a sensory modality is missing from the description) are not of that nature.

II. PUZZLES & PULP IF

Strangely, I find I remember the general mood of good adventures before I
can recall the specific puzzles.  Probably a hint that we really don't play
for the puzzles.  God knows I spent lots of time making all the puzzles
in _Inmate_ logical and challenging, but the game on the whole (at least
my playtesters gave me this impression) strikes people as boring.
Perhaps computer fiction has not yet advanced to the point where we can
dispense with exotic locales, otherwordly events and characters, or
high-action scenarios.  That is, we're still pulp comics.

Phil Goetz
goetz@cs.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction