#
ISSUE #26 - September 26, 2001

          ___.               .___              _             ___.
         /  _|               |   \            / \           / ._|
         \  \                | o_/           |   |          | |_.
         .\  \               | |             | o |          | | |
    The  |___/ociety for the |_|romotion of  |_|_|dventure  \___|ames.

                             ISSUE #26

               Edited by Paul O'Brian (obrian SP@G colorado.edu)
                         September 26, 2001

               SPAG Website: http://www.sparkynet.com/spag

    SPAG #26 is copyright (c) 2001 by Paul O'Brian.
    Authors of reviews and articles retain the rights to their contributions.

    All email addresses are spamblocked -- replace the name of our magazine
    with the traditional 'at' sign.

    ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE ----------------------------------------------------

    The SPAG Interview with Volker Blasius and David Kinder

    REVIEWS IN THIS ISSUE -----------------------------------------------------

    Alien Abduction?
    Bugged
    Hobbit -- The True Story
    Lost
    Lost New York
    Ribbons
    The Weapon

    EDITORIAL------------------------------------------------------------------

    The timing of this issue makes it a little difficult to write an
    editorial. Usually, when editorial time comes, I just decide what IF
    topic is uppermost in my mind and write something about that. But with
    just over two weeks since the horrifying terrorist attacks of September
    11, those attacks and their ramifications are still the One Topic in my
    mind, crowding out ordinary considerations and making perfectly good
    hobbies like IF seem, well, a bit trivial. Like light bends when it hits
    a prism, I find all my orderly thoughts refracting through this theme
    and looking rather different when they come out the other side. So when
    I sat down to write this editorial, I was aware that some people are
    really sick of the One Topic, but I was equally aware that for me, it
    was what I needed to write about.

    Consequently, instead of fighting it, I want to spend a little time
    thinking about the value of IF in the face of overwhelming tragedy.
    Certainly, there's the virtue of escapism -- like a Busby Berkeley movie
    during the American Depression, IF lets us get away from all the
    anxieties of the world for a little while and just have fun. Also,
    there's the fact that the IF community is international, and thus can
    provide a global perspective on events; I find that perspective
    pleasantly bracing from within the tidal wave of hyper-patriotism
    that the attacks have unleashed here in the States. But the first of
    these points would be true of any art form, and the second true of any
    Internet community. What does IF, in particular, offer us?

    I think the key is in the idea of control. It's an oft-repeated truism
    that successful IF doesn't offer the player complete control over the
    story, but rather the *illusion* of such control. Examining how much
    control the player does or doesn't possess has been a preoccupation of
    much recent IF, and I think that's because issues of control are central
    to IF as a medium. Even traditional Infocom-style IF is fundamentally
    concerned with communicating the idea that its protagonists can have a
    significant, permanent impact on their world. In our world, where it's
    easy to feel helplessly, terrifyingly out of control, that illusion is
    to be cherished. Even if it's just for a second.

    NEWS ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    NEW RELEASES SHELF
    There are several things worth noting about the crop of games released
    this summer. Alongside the slew of regular games and mini-games
    (including the TADS epic First Things First, by last year's XYZZY Best
    Game author J. Robinson Wheeler), made with a variety of systems from
    Inform to ADRIFT to Alan to SUDS, there are several demos which make
    significant inroads into multimedia territory. Adam Cadre's Zeta Space
    demo utilizes a windowed interface, graphics, and nifty synthesizer
    sounds, while Ladystar: The New Girl employs full-screen,
    anime-influenced illustrations combined with a CYOA-type text adventure.
    Finally, for authors who want to travel further in this direction,
    there's Marnie Parker's Just A Dream demo, which demonstrates how to
    achieve various effects using the Glulx runtime.
       * Pick Up The Phone Booth And Aisle by various authors
       * Stranded by Jim Bayers
       * The Long Journey Home by Danny Chabino
       * A Night in Spooksville by Landry Q. Walker
       * The Weapon by Sean T. Barrett
       * First Things First by J. Robinson Wheeler
       * Ladystar: The New Girl by Heavy Cat Multimedia
       * Zeta Space (demo) by Adam Cadre
       * City of Secrets (trailer) by Emily Short
       * Just A Dream (demo) by Marnie Parker
       * On A Horse With No Name by Greg Ewing
       * Large Machine by Gringo G. Scumm
       * Burglar! by Doug Roberts

    ON THE MOVE
    The big news of the summer is that after nearly nine years at
    ftp.gmd.de, the IF Archive is moving. In honor of the work that Volker
    Blasius and David Kinder have done in maintaining the Archive, they're
    the subjects of this issue's SPAG Interview, so I'll let them explain
    why this change has come about. The Archive's new home is
    ftp.ifarchive.org, and its maintainers are Kinder and Stephen Granade,
    with technical maintenance by Paul Asay ("Goob") and Andrew Plotkin
    ("Zarf").

    BEFORE THE BEGINNING
    After I released SPAG #25, I realized that there was an important news
    item I forgot to include, and what made the error particularly
    embarrassing is that I actually served as a judge for the event in
    question. I'm referring to the PrologueComp, organized by David Myers
    and inviting participants to craft a prologue for a hypothetical game.
    The comp got an impressive 23 entrants, which were reviewed by a panel
    of judges consisting of myself, Nick Montfort, Dennis Jerz, Robb
    Sherwin, Digby McWiggle, and Myers himself. It was great fun, and
    generated some excellent discussion of how prologues operate -- check
    out the results at
    http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Stu/dmyers/PrologueComp.html

    DON'T JUST RTFM, CTFM2PDF
    Infocom was always known for the exceedingly fine quality of its
    manuals, documentation, and associated "feelies," but in the reissues of
    its games during the 90's, that quality declined steadily. The
    documentation in the Lost Treasures packages tended to consist of
    slapped-together photocopies and sketchy, sometimes-incomplete OCR scans
    of the old documentation, and the Masterpieces of Infocom CD just took
    most of this material and converted it to PDF format, saving weight on
    the package. At its nadir, Activision was selling Masterpieces in a
    downloadable format with no documentation whatsoever, despite the fact
    that most of those games are copy-protected via their feelies. Into this
    sad state of affairs charged Gunther Schmidl and Roger J. Long. Their
    Infocom Documentation Project has, with the permission of Activision,
    endeavored to recreate (in PDF format) all the Infocom manuals "as close
    to their original form as possible," as well as converting them to a
    format easily readable by screen readers for the blind. Only a few of
    the manuals are complete so far, but the project also offers all copies
    of Infocom's newsletter (called The New Zork Times, then The Status
    Line) as well as zcode versions of Invisiclues for all the games. This
    cornucopia is available at http://infodoc.plover.net/.

    A SPAG WITHOUT REVIEWS IS NO SPAG AT ALL
    You may have noticed that this issue of SPAG is on the slim side, and
    there's a reason for that: not many people submitted reviews to me this
    summer. Whether SPAG's anorexia continues to worsen is up to you --
    without reviews, there is no SPAG. And don't try that old "I don't know
    what to review" line; I've got your list right here:

    SPAG 10 MOST WANTED LIST
    ========================
    1.  Acheton
    2.  Bad Machine
    3.  First Things First
    4.  Frobozz Magic Support
    5.  Heroine's Mantle
    6.  Large Machine
    7.  The Long Journey Home
    8.  On A Horse With No Name
    9.  Pick Up The Phone Booth and Aisle
    10. Stranded

    THE SPAG INTERVIEW---------------------------------------------------------

    In 1992, something very special happened in the IF community: it
    acquired an archive. Volker Blasius offered a repository at ftp.gmd.de,
    and the IF scene underwent a paradigm shift. Where before various
    development systems, games, and documents were scattered far and wide,
    now they were centrally located, well organized, and easy to find. That
    archive acted as a magnet, attracting people to the community and
    strengthening those already within it. Now that the archive is moving
    from gmd.de to ifarchive.org, the time seems right to speak with its
    indefatigable maintainers, Volker Blasius and David Kinder.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Volker Blasius ~~~

       SPAG: Could you tell us a little about yourself? Who are you, what do
       you do for a living, and so forth?

    VB: Oompf, who am I - quite a philosophical question.

    I was born of poor because honest parents -- no, nonsense, though it
    contains some truth. I just love this opening line from Ambrose Bierce's
    The City of the Gone Away, and I've always been trying to use it
    somewhere. :)

    Let's try again. So far my life has been anything but spectacular. Born
    in '43, standard childhood for this post-World-War-II time, standard
    school career, always living in the same place here in Germany. My home
    town didn't have a university then, so I moved to Bonn after military
    service to study mathematics - the early computers fascinated me, so I
    chose the subject closest to them at the time.

    The university had an IBM 7090 and offered programming courses, so I
    immediately started on my favorite topic. In my second semester I got a
    part-time job in the university computer center; the computer center
    developed into GMD, and my student's job developed into a full-time job
    when I got my degree (nominally still in mathematics). So I'm more or
    less still where I began.

    (OK, what I've been doing here changed over time, of course. At first I
    was in a department that developed its own time sharing system under
    OS/360 MFT (I did some of the hardware programming), later I became head
    of system administration for the MVS mainframe until GMD dropped that
    line altogether. Since then I've mainly been dabbling in PCs, their
    hardware and their operating systems, supporting people running into
    trouble.)

    Now I just turned 58 and I'm three years into my five-year
    old-age-part-time-retirement contract. This is a German specialty: About
    five years ago the federal government decided to have another go at
    getting rid of old farts sitting on valuable jobs and passed a law that
    guaranteed 70% pay for 50% of work. Your company can reclaim the excess
    20% from federal administration if it gives the 50% you get free to
    someone looking for his/her first job. After two years of negotiations
    the unions raised the 70% to 80%, and that's when I signed my contract
    to work half-time for five years and then retire.

       SPAG: For those that don't know, just what is GMD?

    VB: Early computers were too expensive even for a university to buy, so
    our state here created and funded a company that bought and ran a
    computer for the university at Bonn. (Computers were then considered as
    instruments to be used for mathematics, so the company was called IIM -
    Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Instrumentelle Mathematik. Still a
    funny name.) In 1968 the federal government took over and converted the
    IIM into GMD, the Gesellschaft für Mathematik und Datenverarbeitung,
    located in Sankt Augustin near Bonn. Later it was renamed to German
    National Research Center for Information Technology (and its German
    equivalent), but the well-established acronym GMD was kept.

    GMD did much more than just run a mainframe; it grew to 1200+ people who
    did all kinds of research in and around mathematics and computers. Most
    of it was basic research, and that's what GMD was explicitly founded und
    funded for, but now the tide has turned - basic research was declared
    useless and GMD was handed off to the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (FhG) to
    do applied research, i.e. earn short-term money or perish. GMD will be
    broken up into many small units fighting for themselves and against each
    other. Funding is guaranteed until 2005, but nobody knows will be left
    after this date.

       SPAG: Was it difficult to persuade them that an archive of text
       adventures was something worth keeping on their ftp server?

    VB: No, it wasn't, because I didn't ask them. Like all the good things
    here, the archive began as what we call a submarine - somebody finds a
    topic interesting and starts working on it while officially doing
    something different. If the idea proves feasible, the submarine surfaces
    and becomes an official topic. Access to the ftp server wasn't
    difficult, either. I've been in the IT infrastructure department for
    quite some time now, so the admins are just the guys next door working
    in the same group.

       SPAG: Could you give a little bit of history on how the IF archive
       came about?

    VB: I knew text adventures from ADVENT on the IBM mainframe, which
    really got me hooked, and later Dungeon on a VAX. The VAX belonged to a
    different department, so my access to it was limited and I wasn't able
    to finish the game. I bought my first computer in 1989 and wasn't
    interested in micro computers until then, so I didn't even know Infocom
    and the other companies existed.

    This changed when the data center was closed because nobody used the
    mainframe for scientific purposes any more, and I had to find a new job.
    I joined the department that's responsible for GMD's central server
    machines and the network and started working with Unix and the Internet.
    I also did some PC/DOS/Windows service, using support BBSes and
    CompuServe - all this was new to me, so I looked around everywhere.

    I forgot the details, but at some time during this period I must have
    found the free and shareware text adventures, the r*if community and the
    early TADS games. I soon found that the good things were scattered
    everywhere, and being used to data center operations I thought that a
    central repository would be a good idea. I asked the only person I knew,
    Dave Baggett, co-author of the Unnkulian Unventures, for his opinion,
    and he agreed. I asked for space on GMD's central ftp server and started
    the archive with stuff Dave Baggett and I downloaded from wherever we
    found it. I kept the original date in the README file: 12nov1992.

    The archive was a success right from the start. People soon started
    uploading games, info and development systems they had written or found
    or kept on their private disks, and then it ran all by itself.

    The first mirror (wuarchive) was started in January, 1993. When Chris
    Myers asked me how big the archive was, I answered, "About 12 MB now;
    growing to maybe twice as much." It's 1131 MB today...

    Dave Baggett couldn't help any longer when he left MIT. Fortunately
    David Kinder volunteered to step in, and gradually the burden has
    shifted more and more onto his shoulders - during the last years he has
    done practically all of the work alone. I never could have managed
    without him.

       SPAG: What have been some of the IF games you've enjoyed most, and
       why?

    VB: Now this is a somewhat embarrassing topic - I'm probably the person
    who knows and has played the fewest games in the community. ADVENT will
    never lose the glory of first love, of course. I like science fiction,
    so Planetfall was my favorite Infocom game. And there was J. Doug
    McDonald's World, another SF game. I started many games, but usually I
    get interrupted for a week or two, and I never pick it up again. World
    was the only exception to this rule: I played it off and on for about 6
    years until I finally solved it.

    Another game I enjoyed immensely and have always been planning to resume
    (or rather restart after all this time) is Graham Nelson's Curses.
    Anchorhead looked very good, too, but it was another victim to some
    interruption - vacation without computers, I think. The only recent game
    I played was Photopia, and I only managed to complete it because I could
    play it on my Palm. Quite a different experience, but a very good game,
    I think.

       SPAG: Do you plan to continue contributing to the IF community in the
       future, and if so, how?

    VB: Probably not. Apart from the archive and one or two solutions, I
    haven't contributed anything, so this won't be much of a loss. The only
    important thing is that the archive will be continued, and thanks to
    Goob, Zarf, David and Stephen this problem has been solved. I don't know
    how to thank them enough.

       SPAG: If not, how do you think you'll spend your newfound free time?

    VB: Since David has been doing all the work for the last two or three
    years, there is no newfound free time, I'm afraid. I don't really know
    where my time is disappearing, but it does. I have a huge pile of games
    waiting to be played when I retire, a programming project I've been
    planning to do since about 1970 (and which I'm going to begin Real Soon
    Now), I have my dog and like to hike with her, I've recently taken up
    cycling again after 30 years - no, I've no idea where all that time
    goes.

    But I'll keep lurking. You won't see me, but I'll be watching you. :)

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ David Kinder ~~~

       SPAG: Could you tell us a little about yourself? Who are you, what do
       you do for a living, and so forth?

    DK: I'm a computer programmer living in Oxford, England, and working in
    London. My firm writes specialized programs for the financial
    derivatives market; it always amuses me that the programs I write for
    fun have a bigger audience than those I do for work :) I'm also turning
    30 this year, though I'm trying to pretend that that's not going to
    happen ...

       SPAG: How did you come to be co-maintainer of the IF archive?

    DK: Way back in 1992 I finished my undergraduate course and became a
    member of a research group at the university. At the same time, the
    university was then getting around to connecting every PC to its network
    and the Internet, so about then I discovered Usenet and the
    rec.*.int-fiction groups. Along with a lot of others, my interest in
    text adventures had been restarted about a year before by the release of
    "The Lost Treasures of Infocom", so it wasn't too surprising that I was
    soon reading the groups every day.

    Now, one of the advantages (or problems, depending on perspective) of
    doing physics research is that you can often find yourself spending ages
    keeping an eye on experiments. It's not easy to really do anything
    involved, as you need to keep watching the experiment, so one night I
    found myself wandering around the IF-Archive. At that point the
    /unprocessed/ folder had become rather full, so I decided to give Volker
    a hand by working out where all these files should go and writing up
    Index entries for them. After doing this a few times Volker asked if I'd
    like to become a maintainer, and I've been at it ever since ...

       SPAG: What changes do you anticipate now that the archive has moved
       from gmd.de to ifarchive.org? Do you plan any innovations for the
       archive's future?

    DK: It's unlikely that the basic structure of the archive will change,
    but something will happen with the indexing system. Currently the plain
    text "Index" files are okay for people to read, but they're not so
    suitable for processing by programs. Zarf is working on an XML
    definition that will let us have machine readable indexes from which we
    can create human readable Index files.

       SPAG: What have been some of the IF games you've enjoyed most, and
       why?

    DK: Curses, for the evil puzzles, and the fact that it (along with the
    Unkuulia games) really seemed to push the level of amateur text
    adventures away from the rather poor efforts of the past. When I first
    started reading the newsgroups the consensus view was still that Infocom
    had written all the best text adventures; now the community writes the
    best ones itself.

    Photopia, because I've never read ("played" seems inappropriate)
    anything quite like it, especially Alley's dream of meeting the Queen of
    the dead world.

    Loads of others spring to mind, especially those that have pushed back
    the barriers of what is possible: Worlds Apart, Galatea, My Angel,
    Shade...

       SPAG: I know you've made extensive contributions to the archive
       yourself, in the form of ports and technical tools. Is this the only
       role in which you see yourself, or have you ever given any thought to
       authoring a game?

    DK: I like writing ports and implementations of IF engines as it can
    throw up some interesting coding problems, such as: How do you write a
    Glk implementation that can reformat the text in the window if it
    resizes, even if the text is in different sizes, and has pictures
    embedded in it?

    DK: Writing games calls for something else again: Not just skill but
    artistic vision. Having said that, I do have some sketches somewhere for
    a game idea I had. I'm not going to jinx it by saying anything though,
    but maybe for one competition I'll get around to it.

    KEY TO SCORES AND REVIEWS--------------------------------------------------

    Consider the following review header:

    NAME: Cutthroats
    AUTHOR: Infocom
    EMAIL: ???
    DATE: September 1984
    PARSER: Infocom Standard
    SUPPORTS: Z-code (Infocom/Inform) interpreters
    AVAILABILITY: LTOI 2
    URL: Not available.

    When submitting reviews:  Try to fill in as much of this info as you can.
    If you choose, you may also provide scores for the games you review, as
    explained in the SPAG FAQ. The scores will be used in the ratings
    section.  Authors may not rate or review their own games.

    More elaborate descriptions of the rating and scoring systems may be found
    in the FAQ and in issue #9 of SPAG, which should be available at:

            ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/magazines/SPAG/
     and at http://www.sparkynet.com/spag

    REVIEWS -------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: Duncan Stevens

    TITLE: Alien Abduction?
    AUTHOR: Charles Gerlach
    E-MAIL: cagerlac SP@G merle.acns.nwu.edu
    DATE: 1996
    PARSER: TADS standard
    SUPPORTS: TADS interpreters
    AVAILABILITY: Freeware (IF Archive)
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/games/tads/abductv2.gam
    VERSION: Release 2

    One of the many trends in IF of recent years has been to emphasize
    characterization, and in particular the character of the player
    character, over puzzles. An early portent of that trend was Charles
    Gerlach's Alien Abduction?, a 1996 competition entry that endeavors to
    make the PC something other than a cipher. The result isn't a total
    triumph, mostly because the game didn't fully emancipate itself from
    puzzlefest expectations, but it's an interesting attempt.

    It seems you're convinced that aliens are out to abduct you; a similar
    conviction landed your father in an asylum, but you know what you know.
    Sure enough, aliens do come by and -- after making you play a variant on
    Mastermind -- release you again, but the reality you go back to has some
    incongruities, notably that your father is back, showing no signs of
    having been carted away. Your goal, at that point, is to make sense of
    the incongruities.

    At least, I think so, and therein lies the difficulty. It's far from
    clear to the player at that point what he or she should be doing; that
    things seem to be a little off-kilter doesn't point the player in any
    particular direction for purposes of addressing the problem, and nothing
    that you find as you explore the off-kilter world (which is quite small
    as it is) is particularly illuminating. You can talk to your father, and
    while he has quite a lot to say, nothing really gives you much of a clue
    about what you're supposed to be doing. The solution isn't wholly
    illogical, it turns out, but it requires some fairly tortured inferences
    about various characters and how they react to certain stimuli.
    Considering that this puzzle is the heart of the game -- there are
    several subpuzzles, but most of the game is given over to one central
    problem -- not having a sense of what you're doing is a major flaw. This
    isn't a characterization problem, as such -- there are good reasons for
    the PC to do what he does. It's just that the player doesn't know enough
    about the PC (and his past) to understand those reasons.

    The problem springs in part from the game's attempts at giving the PC a
    specific identity and background, since the solution to the central problem
    hinges on the player's having a much deeper understanding of that background
    than seems likely, given the available evidence. Specifically, the problem
    turns on a certain NPC's psychology, for the most part, and the game didn't
    provide enough exposition to permit the player to draw the right inferences.
    This is good, in a certain respect; NPCs with psychological makeup more
    complex than some variant on "feed me" are relatively uncommon. That also
    means, however, that the player cannot necessarily be counted on to see what
    the author wants him/her to see, unless the author spells everything out in
    nice big letters (which defeats the point, to some extent). Here, there are
    clues scattered around, but it's a fairly long leap from the clues to the
    solution. (A related problem is that the solution requires inferring that a
    certain bit of technology has what seems a grave flaw; I certainly didn't
    find any suggestions that there was such a flaw.)

    Mostly because of those psychological intricacies, Alien Abduction? is a
    pretty difficult game -- it's entirely possible that you, the player,
    will stumble on the solution by accident, but that's not exactly
    satisfying. There are, let me emphasize, internal hints, and those are
    handy indeed -- and the game as a whole has a certain twisted logic once
    you understand what's going on. It seemed to me, however, that there
    wasn't much chance of the player attaining such an understanding without
    the hints. There's also one rather artificial puzzle (a.k.a. a "soup
    can" puzzle) -- the presence of the aliens supplies an excuse (they're
    testing you, you see), but not a great excuse, and the game would have
    been better, I think, had that puzzle been omitted.

    While Alien Abduction? doesn't quite work as a fusion of puzzle-solving
    challenge and character study, it does work as a mood piece and as a
    mess-with-your-head game in the tradition of Delusions and Spider and
    Web. (Yes, I'm aware that this preceded Spider and Web, but that's the
    paradigmatic example.) The discover-what's-going-on process is
    thoroughly creepy -- there's no big payoff, but there's a series of
    smaller surprises that effectively kept me guessing. The
    almost-normality of the setting works nicely (though it might have
    worked even better if the game gave the player more of a chance to
    explore the layout at the beginning, the better to appreciate the
    changes, Wishbringer-style; as it is, the game mostly tells the player
    "hey, this and that are different"), and lots of relatively nonessential
    objects and conversation topics are implemented, so the player isn't
    likely to keep running up against the game's boundaries (never a good
    thing in a mood piece). As for the mess-with-your-head factor, the game
    does a nice job of raising doubts about the PC's sanity and reliability,
    though those doubts are largely tangential to what actually goes on in
    the game; you may question whether the PC's perceptions are true, but
    you can largely assume that they are for purposes of getting through the
    game. That aside, unreliable narrators are a fun device, central to the
    progress of the story or not.

    How well Alien Abduction? works is a function of the player's
    expectations, I suppose -- it's certainly a well-written game with some
    suspenseful moments and good deal of atmosphere, and if you're someone
    who enjoys IF that emphasizes setting and mood, and who doesn't care
    overmuch about being able to solve the puzzles without reliance on
    hints, this is definitely for you. (I'm sure I'll hear from people
    claiming to have finished the game with no hints in seconds flat, but I
    call 'em like I see 'em, and I just don't see enough in the game to
    enable the player to understand the logic of the puzzles ex ante.) In
    that respect, the intervening years have made the IF audience somewhat
    more receptive to this game -- a well-crafted story with
    not-entirely-well-crafted puzzles is perhaps more welcome now than it
    was in 1996, though the tendency these days, I think, is to omit or
    downplay the puzzles. (In other words, the tendency for an author
    writing this game now might be to let the PC make some of the trickier
    inferences himself, rather than making the player do it; the
    interactivity would be thereby reduced, of course, but life is full of
    tradeoffs.) To the extent that Alien Abduction? tries to squeeze both
    challenging puzzles and some complex personalities and character
    interactions into the same game, it's a laudable effort; to the extent
    that it doesn't quite succeed, well, not many games can be called a
    total success on both those levels, and this was an early shot at it.
    It's not a roaring success, but it certainly has its moments.

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    From: Duncan Stevens

    TITLE: Bugged
    AUTHOR: Anssi Raisanen
    E-MAIL: anssi.raisanen SP@G cop.fi
    DATE: 2001
    PARSER: Alan (full-sentence)
    SUPPORTS: Alan runtimes
    AVAILABILITY: Freeware (IF Archive)
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/alan/bugged.zip
    VERSION: Release 1.0

    Anyone who's ever tried to slog through a vintage AGT game will get a
    chuckle or two out of Bugged, where the bugs are deliberate -- you're
    beta-testing a game for a cousin, see, and the cousin needs a lot of
    programming help, and the only way to plow through the game is through
    exploiting bugs (because the solutions your cousin has attempted to
    implement don't work, due to other bugs). It's no more than a chuckle,
    but chuckles are important in the IF world too.

    The bugs themselves are standard-issue: takeable objects that aren't,
    untakeable objects that are, mostly, along with a dash of verbs
    defaulting to the wrong noun. Getting into the spirit of things takes a
    while -- unless you're a long-standing beta-tester, you're unlikely to
    think of getting rid of an obstacle by simply taking it, say -- and
    things get difficult toward the end, when you're carrying around all
    kinds of immobile objects and it's not clear which one of them is
    useful. (The last puzzle, in fact, turns on a bizarre syntax trick that
    fits nicely into a buggy game but doesn't exactly spring to mind
    otherwise.) In other words, the bugs accumulate over the course of the
    game, after a fashion, and the potential for ridiculous interactions
    among various unlikely objects becomes considerable. Some of the bugs
    strain credulity a bit -- it's not clear what sort of coding error would
    make an object both out of reach and takeable. Likewise, it sometimes
    seems like every single object that should be takeable isn't and every
    one that shouldn't be is, suggesting that the "cousin" simply doesn't
    understand the word "static" (or an Alan equivalent) -- but on the whole
    it's a plausible buggy game.

    The joke, I suppose, is that the buggy game is more interesting than the
    non-buggy one would have been; the puzzles that you would have solved
    are bog-standard, whereas the buggy version at least requires some
    thinking outside the box. True enough, though it's hard to picture
    anyone writing a game that's quite as boring as the one your cousin
    supposedly tried to write, and in that light it's not hard to come up
    with something more interesting. For my part, I found Bugged
    entertaining simply because it's loopy in the usual way of a buggy game;
    something about picking up apparently huge objects with no comment on
    your feat of strength is inherently amusing, though the humor would
    probably pall in a game of any length. As it is, Bugged is quite short,
    short enough that most players are unlikely to tire of the idea before
    reaching the end.

    The main problem with Bugged is the lack of a hint system (and in this
    case a hint system is even more preferable to a walkthrough than usual,
    because the puzzles are well suited for nudges but the solutions are
    usually one-move) -- it's frustrating enough to struggle with a game
    that's trying to be helpful, but when things are intentionally broken
    it's even worse, as there are (naturally) no clues that you're on the
    right track. In fact, since some bugs amount to red herrings, it's
    possible to get suckered into trying to exploit the wrong bugs
    altogether. I ended up poring over the data file to solve a few of the
    puzzles, which is appropriate, in a way -- cheat to finish a game whose
    premise is cheating to finish a game -- but not especially satisfying.

    Bugged is a twenty-minute diversion at most -- if it takes you longer,
    resort to the data file -- but it's amusing enough, and perhaps it's a
    fitting tribute to/preparation for the upcoming competition. (Shame on
    this cynical reviewer.) IF veterans should get a kick out of it.

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    [As always with Mr. Starkov's reviews, I've heavily edited this prose
    (and that in his review of "The Weapon", below) in an attempt to hammer
    it into sensible English. Mistakes may have been made in this process;
    comprehend at your own risk. --Paul]

    From: Stas Starkov

    NAME: Hobbit - The True Story
    AUTHOR: Fredrik Ramsberg and Johan Berntsson
    EMAIL: d91frera SP@G und.ida.liu.se (Ramsberg -- no address provided for
           Berntsson)
    DATE: Monday 19 April 1993
    PARSER: Very strange and not very good
    SUPPORTS: DOS
    AVAILABILITY: Shareware -- $10, but I think it's a joke
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/pc/hobbit.zip

    NAME: The Terror of Mecha Godzilla - The True Story
    AUTHOR: Fredrik Ramsberg
    EMAIL: d91frera SP@G und.ida.liu.se
    DATE: Monday 4 October 1993
    PARSER: Very strange and not very good
    SUPPORTS: DOS
    AVAILABILITY: Shareware -- $10, but I think it's a joke
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/pc/mecha.zip

    First of all, the reviewed games are written as MS-DOS 5.0 batch files,
    and require some fiddling with your computer. (That doesn't mean that
    you need to hit the computer with a hammer.) Personally, I was not able
    to run these games in a DOS box under Windows 9x. But I have not tried
    hard -- for me it's faster to reboot the computer into DOS mode. I think
    you'll probably need to do the same. Another problem that I encountered
    _before_ I started the game is that the ZIP files are archived with
    rather old archiver (I think -- pkzip 1.x) and my archiver (7-ZIP, if
    you want to know) was not able to unpack all the files from the
    archives. Then I used WinZip and everything was well. But, hell, these
    are real puzzles in real life. Sometimes I like to solve these sorts of
    puzzles, but not very often. :-)

    As the authors claim, these two games were written in 1993, using a very
    strange language called Adventure Maker, which compiled the games to
    batch files. As a player, I sometimes like to switch from games written
    in a good authoring system to games written in another system, one that
    is not so good. It's fun to compare old computer technologies with
    modern ones.

    Well, the games' "parsers" are not very powerful, but it's amazing that
    you can type commands at just a DOS command prompt! Yes, after loading a
    "restart.bat", you can play in raw DOS. It's so bizarre that you don't
    need an interpreter to play these games, and that you can run any
    program, then quit from that program and continue to play the game. That
    _is_ fun. But quite strange fun. On the other hand, there are no UNDO,
    SAVE, or OOPS commands. If you've made a wrong move (as is especially
    likely in "Godzilla") you must start from the beginning. But that
    doesn't hurt, because the games are so small, and so linear.

    The games themselves are not very strong. I think they were probably
    written in one or two days each -- they're short and not very polished,
    but fun. Why are they fun? Because they use a somewhat offbeat sense of
    humor and because their scenery is very familiar. The first game,
    "Hobbit", is about the hobbit Bilbo Baggins, and the second, "Godzilla",
    is about Godzilla in Tokyo. If you've never heard these words before,
    you must have been living on the moon for the last fifty years. Of
    course, these games are parodies.

    "Hobbit" is a story about a hobbit who wants to kill a dragon and loot
    its gold. For the "untrue" story of this hobbit, you can read the book
    "The Hobbit" by J. R. R. Tolkien. But even more than it parodies the
    book, this game parodies Melbourne House's game with the very familiar
    name "The Hobbit". People who have played Melbourne House's game will
    notice that the solutions to some of the puzzles in this game are almost
    identical. Continuing the list of influences: I think the authors of
    this game have probably read the book "Bored Of the Rings" by Henry R.
    Berd and Douglas K. Kenny, (excuse me if I somehow changed the names --
    I have only a Russian translation) [The authors of "Bored Of The Rings"
    are Henry N. Beard and Douglas C. Kenney. --Paul] which is itself a
    parody on J. R. R. Tolkien's work. There is nothing groundbreaking in
    this book, but there are a lot of funny moments, especially if you only
    read a few pages each day. Next -- I do (barely) remember that once I
    had read a solution to some game (whose title I don't remember at all)
    for the ZX Spectrum, a game that, as far as I can tell from the dull
    reflection of its solution, utilized the same approach to humor.

    The humor in this game is strange, but I like it. A small example, if
    you try to show a map to Thorin when you aren't carrying it:

       Thorin eyes you suspiciously. "Don't try any tricks, boy. We both
       know that there is no map here, now don't we?" he asks. He doesn't
       seem too sure about it himself.

    The implementation of the game is bad, but so what! A seasoned
    adventurer such as yourself will find a way through the rubble of bad
    code. If not, maybe the hints for Melbourne House's "Hobbit" will help.
    And if that doesn't work, "disassemble" this game -- it's not very hard.
    :-)

    The NPCs in the game are strange. For example, Thorin:

       Thorin, your old friend, is no longer the proud dwarf he once was.
       All the drugs have turned him into a drooling good-for-nothing idiot.
       The only reason that he has come along is to get more treasures for
       drugs, as always.

    Gandalf is a dumb magician who is inventing a new spell of a rather
    shady nature (and I recommend you explore that subject). Elrond -- a
    megalomaniac who wants to rule the entire world. Smaug -- a fat lazy
    dragon.

    If you put yourself in Bilbo's place, you'll notice that the surrounding
    world is very cruel and evil. Your good old "friends" despise you. It's
    terrible to live as a hobbit in such a world.

    "Godzilla" is not as good, nor as funny, as "Hobbit". It is longer, and
    has several "guess the word" problems that make it quite difficult. This
    game does have some violent moments (for example, a moment with a huge
    tank and a poor doggy), but if you remember the Japanese (and one
    American) movies about Godzilla, you will understand why the author
    includes those moments. (If you still don't understand, I'll tell you --
    because those movies are so disgustingly pathetic and simultaneously
    have so much aggression that, after viewing them, you yourself want to
    kill several monsters or just animals. :-)

    "Godzilla" has a more "advanced" version of the parser. Because of that,
    the batch files are harder to read (yes, read the source code to get
    hints to the game), but that didn't stop me. To tell the truth, I tried
    six or seven times to finish this game before starting to read through
    the batch files

    Overall, if you have a little extra time to kill, try "Hobbit". If you
    like it, try "Godzilla", but do not try them in the reverse order. And
    be prepared for bugs, but again, these games are so short that the bugs
    should be no problem.

    And did you notice that both games were released on a Monday? Odd.

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    From: Duncan Stevens

    TITLE: Lost
    AUTHOR: Eric Mayer
    E-MAIL: emayer00 SP@G epix.net
    DATE: 2001
    PARSER: ADRIFT
    SUPPORTS: ADRIFT runtimes
    AVAILABILITY: Freeware (IF Archive)
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/adrift/lost.zip
    VERSION: First release

    Making emotional content plausible in IF ain't easy. Getting a player to
    feel what the protagonist is supposed to be feeling requires subtlety
    (more than "you're feeling angry now"), good writing (at least, good
    enough that the player doesn't notice it and get pulled out of the
    flow), and, most of all, time -- a story that's long enough for the
    player to settle into the protagonist's skin before any serious
    emotion-imputing begins. Eric Mayer's Lost is a highly emotional game,
    and while it does passably well on the first two counts, it's simply not
    long enough, in my book, to achieve the desired effect.

    It seems that the protagonist is upset about all manner of things,
    primarily the decaying states of his marriage and his job, and he heads
    for a walk in the woods. As he wanders and examines things, thoughts run
    through his mind (in different colored text lest he miss their
    significance), and the forest setting, while nicely rendered, is of
    course merely a backdrop for the stuff going on in his head. He solves
    one fairly simple puzzle (rendered more complicated only by the
    unfriendliness of the ADRIFT parser), and a few sounds and apparitions
    later, the protagonist has a choice of sorts. One of two different
    endings ensues.

    Not to belabor the point, but it must be belabored: the protagonist can
    reach this ending point inside of 30 moves if he's pretty direct about
    it, and isn't likely to take more than 60-70 even if he stops to smell
    all the roses he can find. His ruminations about his past, however,
    start right away and come relatively thick and fast. If you, the player,
    don't decide to identify with the protagonist right away, you may just
    miss your chance entirely. Now, there may be some for whom losing a
    marriage and a job simultaneously strikes an instant chord of
    recognition, and if you're one of those, I sympathize and recommend Lost
    -- but the rest of us need some more prompting before we can identify
    with the protagonist. Perhaps, with more exploration of his personality,
    we might see ourselves, or someone we know, in this character. But the
    protagonist's personality is almost wholly absent from Lost: we know
    what he feels, but not who he is. As such, he had my sympathy, but I was
    a spectator.

    The backdrop, for what it's worth, is fine -- the woods are well
    rendered, with attention to detail. There are some glitches in the
    writing (e.g., "A few tough, spikes which used to be limbs, protrude"),
    and the style tends toward the choppy ("Here and there grassy hillocks
    are interspersed with dead trees. At the edge, cattails rattle in the
    breeze. There is a wooden post here. The swamp is impassable."), but
    there are some nice spots as well: "The lingering twilight floods the
    top of the reentrant with a rusty glow." There are occasional fuzzy
    pictures (which feel the need to reappear, necessitating window-closing,
    every time you return to the location in question), which don't enhance
    things much, but as a walk-in-the-woods game this is okay. (There are
    occasional sidelights about orienteering, which could have used some
    more explanation -- not everyone knows about orienteering, or even that
    the term refers to a sport, if that's the right thing to call it -- but
    as with publicity, there's almost no such thing as bad background
    detail.)

    When it comes to the internal strife, Lost isn't awful, but the game
    doesn't exactly have the lightest touch. The principle of "show, don't
    tell" is observed only haphazardly; one example, when examining a pine
    tree:

       You're reminded of the fragrant, prickly needled Christmas trees you
       used to bring home. How long since you switched to the plastic one?
       You just snap the limbs on and spray it with pine scent. From a
       distance it looks alive. Not unlike you marriage.

    Even aside from the "you marriage," the last sentence ruins what was, up
    to then, a nice little aside -- it conveys the protagonist's
    associations, and that's all it really has to do. The player can draw
    the contrasts, given that much: it's not hard to put the "those were
    happy times, unlike now" pieces together, nor are the
    plastic-instead-of-real-tree dots difficult to connect. The paragraph
    could easily have been stopped after four sentences, or three, or
    (perhaps best of all) two. As it is, the last sentence seems to assume
    the player isn't bright enough to draw any conclusions -- not wholly
    unfair, as the player may be no more than five moves into the game at
    that point (and no more than 25 moves from the end), but the answer to
    that is more game, not signal-flare writing. Similar is this passage:

       Everything here seems still, sheltered from the wind, quiet. It seems
       to you a soothing place, beyond the reach of the world. Ridiculous of
       course, since the highway is a few minutes walk.

    The first sentence is really all that's needed -- the second sentence,
    setting out what the protagonist feels, can just as well be inferred,
    and the player should know that the highway is within a few minutes'
    walk if he or she's been paying attention. The author can clearly write
    -- the writing here is always passable (typos and such aside) and
    sometimes good. It's just that he often seems to write one or two
    sentences too many.

    Picky and grumpy, that's me, but I'd like to think there's a good reason
    here. Writing IF whose success hinges on evoking emotion is a
    hit-or-miss matter; if you don't succeed, you're likely to end up
    sounding kind of mawkish. The player is tempted to snicker, which is
    never a good thing. (A puzzle game that doesn't work may leave the
    player frustrated or baffled, but usually not condescendingly amused.)
    No one likes feeling manipulated, and the nature of the string-pulling
    in Lost is such that it's easy to feel that way. And yet it seems to me
    that all that really needs to change here (aside from some writing
    stuff) is that the ratio of scenery/exploration to emotionalizing needs
    to increase substantially -- there needs to be more going on, such that
    the setting feels like a part of the game rather than an stimulus to get
    the protagonist's mental wheels turning. Give me enough of it so that it
    gets *my* mental wheels turning -- sufficiently so that you can tell the
    story without spelling everything out so, er, blatantly -- and you'll
    really have something.

    Lost has its heart in the right place, but it's trying to accomplish
    something very difficult while devoting minimal resources to the job.
    Good try, say I, but not quite.

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    From: Adam Cadre
    [Note: This review first appeared on the IF-Review website, at
    http://www.ministryofpeace.com/if-review/. --Paul]

    NAME: Lost New York
    AUTHOR: Neil deMause
    EMAIL: neil SP@G demause.net
    DATE: 1996-1997
    PARSER: TADS   (Also available in PC format)
    SUPPORTS: TADS interpreters
    AVAILABILITY: Shareware ($12) (IF Archive)
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/tads/lostny14.gam
    VERSION: 1.4

    LOST NEW YORK by Neil deMause sends the player character bouncing around
    in time, from 1880 to 1905 to 1954 to 1780 to 2040. But none of these
    dates has anywhere near as much effect on the shape of the game as its
    year of publication: 1996.

    For in 1996, the conventional wisdom asserted that the remaining
    audience for text adventures was after just that: text adventures. Games
    were essentially just series of puzzles, with the story as a backdrop,
    the model world as set decoration. Yes, that backdrop and set decoration
    could be and often was masterfully designed, but the idea that one could
    create valid IF simply by building a model world for the player to poke
    around in, or telling a story in which the player could participate,
    only gained widespread acceptance over the subsequent five years, as
    increasingly daring games placed less and less emphasis on puzzles and
    were rewarded with plaudits from an audience that found it rather liked
    that sort of thing. But in 1996, how the audience might respond was an
    open question. Given the amount of effort that goes into a full-length
    work of IF, most authors elected to go with the proven approach. LOST
    NEW YORK is no exception. But while it follows the crowd, it does so
    with obvious reluctance.

    In the spirit of time travel, let's jump back about 400 years, to the
    time of Shakespeare. But not our Shakespeare -- this Shakespeare lives
    in an England where theater audiences are mad about juggling acts. Day
    after day, the Globe is witness to trio after trio of balls, pins and
    torches being flung into the air. But the audiences didn't want to see
    *just* juggling; they wanted the juggling folded into a little story.
    Enter Shakespeare, who soars to fame on the strength of "Romeo and
    Juliet", in which a pair of young people fall in love at a masked ball
    (the chief entertainment there: juggling), but then the boy's friend and
    the girl's cousin get into a ill-fated juggling contest and it all goes
    downhill from there. Now Shakespeare decides he might like to try
    writing a history, perhaps something involving King Henry V... yes, a
    piece tracing his evolution from carousing prince to the inspirational
    leader of his countrymen in a great victory over the French. But he
    can't just tell that story -- where's the juggling? If there's no
    juggling, it's not a real play! So the first act ends up foregrounding a
    bunch of jugglers at the bar while Falstaff and Prince Hal talk in the
    background, and proceeds to the point where the jugglers accompanying
    the army are told that the English have won the battle... and the
    audience response is tepid because while the historical stuff is
    interesting, the juggling isn't as accomplished as that in RITO AND
    IMITA. Shakespeare is left to mutter to himself about the constraints of
    the medium.

    Similarly, it's clear that in LOST NEW YORK, deMause's heart is in the
    geographical and historical material. Virtually all the prose is
    extremely deft, but never is the writing more alive, more joyous, than
    when you die and the author gets to tell you another wacky story about a
    long-dead mayor; never are the quips funnier than when they're playing
    off the geography of the city (try going east from the City Hall area in
    1880, or north into Hell's Kitchen later on.) The fact that the game
    begins with a slideshow and ends with a bibliography is another
    indication of where the author's interests lie. Hint: it's not in
    fiddling around with hairpins and stopwatches.

    But because this was written in 1996, the author felt obliged to fill it
    with juggl-- I mean, puzzles. And these are mostly not very good, being
    chiefly of the type where you're wandering around and find a fishing
    pole, which you take because, well, it's implemented; later on you find
    a stream, and go fishing because, well, that must be what the pole's
    for; you catch a fish and, when you cut it open to cook it, a key falls
    out. What was the key doing in the fish? Well, one of the conventions of
    the genre at the time was that you weren't supposed to ask questions
    like that. That's not actually a puzzle from LOST NEW YORK, but many
    similar ones abound.

    Of course, while the "take everything that's not nailed down, look under
    and behind and inside everything that is" ethic works fine in a dungeon,
    it gets to be a little absurd when transplanted to the island of
    Manhattan. In LOST NEW YORK, Manhattan has like twelve things. And
    that's too many. (Bet you thought I was going to go a different way with
    that, huh?) Again, to avoid spoilers, I'll disguise the details a bit.
    Let's say that the Upper West Side, circa 1965, has been reduced to a
    single location with a mailbox in it. Now, the problem is *not* that
    each street corner should be a separate location, nor that every item in
    every store and every apartment should be implemented. As it stands, the
    location works just fine as a representative area of the Upper West
    Side, and the mailbox works just fine as a representative mailbox. BUT!
    As soon as you fish around in the mailbox and pull out a live monkey
    (which you then stuff into your knapsack) you are no longer dealing with
    the Platonic Mailbox -- you're dealing with a specific, highly unusual
    mailbox. And by extension, this is no longer just a representative
    street corner: it's the particular street corner with the strange
    monkey-containing mailbox. And once players lose the sense that the
    locations they're visiting are representative, they're no longer
    wandering around Manhattan; they're navigating a diorama of Manhattan
    with twelve things in it.

    But it didn't have to be this way. LOST NEW YORK is as much about the
    New Yorks that might have been as the ones that actually have, and in
    that spirit, I can't help but muse about what might have happened had
    Neil deMause had his notes stolen one day in 1995. Disheartened, he puts
    off the project for a few years, till his enthusiasm revives -- only now
    the IF landscape is different. A MIND FOREVER VOYAGING is no longer a
    low-selling oddball; *lots* of games now revolve around exploration
    instead of dinking around with inventory. And so this alternate,
    post-'96 version of LOST NEW YORK takes on a different shape. Instead of
    players getting little more than a glimpse of New York's evolution,
    whatever gets mentioned in passing as they're messing around with goats
    and baseballs in curiously limited regions of the city, they can now
    roam the entirety of the city freely, watching the different
    neighborhoods evolve. Perhaps the interaction with figures who clearly
    fascinate the author -- Robert Moses, Emma Goldman, the various mayors
    -- is more substantial... leading to more New Yorks that might have
    been, perhaps? A fully implemented Moses-free New York, say, or one
    where Goldman's ideals took root... perhaps even a modern-day New
    Amsterdam, if you diverge early enough. And hey, TADS has multimedia
    now: why not throw some pictures into the mix?... oh, and...

    ...and at this point I've got the blueprints for a 21st-century
    skyscraper and am waving them at the base of the Empire State Building.
    The game has been written, and if deMause is anything like me, the idea
    of revisiting a project that was long ago declared done is hardly an
    appealing one...

    ...but hey, it's New York. If it were ever really finished, we wouldn't
    have that old story about the visitor from Nebraska.

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    From: Duncan Stevens

    TITLE: Ribbons
    AUTHOR: J.D. Berry
    E-MAIL: berryx SP@G earthlink.net
    DATE: 2001
    PARSER: Inform standard
    SUPPORTS: Z-code interpreters
    AVAILABILITY: Freeware (IF Archive)
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/zcode/ribbons.z5
    VERSION: Release 2

    A counterpart of sorts to Ian Finley's Exhibition, a 1999 competition
    entry, J.D. Berry's Ribbons, the winning entry in Marnie Parker's 2001
    IF Art Show, takes the "art show" premise and runs with it. It doesn't
    run extremely far, truth be told, but it's a nice concept.

    As in Exhibition, you're in an art gallery, checking out a series of
    exhibits, and as in Exhibition, you get a series of different
    perspectives on each exhibit. Rather than playing the critics, you read
    their critiques, which are posted by each exhibit, but the effect is
    similar -- you learn something new about each work, and about the
    critics, from each critique of it. (At least, that's the hope.) There
    aren't as many exhibits here -- only four, whereas Exhibition had twelve
    -- so there isn't as much room for development of the critics; their
    voices don't develop in the same way that those of Exhibition did.

    The twist is that the works themselves have a better chance of coming
    across because (a) the critics are a little less obsessed with
    themselves than Exhibition's critics were and (b) the works are, to some
    extent, interactive. (It also helps that one of the critics' opinions is
    that of the artist himself/herself.) You can alter certain aspects of
    the works, and the critics' opinions will change (though not their
    ultimate judgments) to reflect the alterations. The results in this
    respect are sometimes amusing: the same critic praises the same work for
    both the presence and absence of an element, or slams an artist's binary
    decision no matter which way it goes. As a jab at criticism itself --
    portraying critics as applying preconceived opinions regardless of what
    they actually find -- this works pretty well.

    Unfortunately, not enough of the game leads to those moments; Ribbons is
    more interactive than Exhibition, but that's not saying a lot.
    Interaction with one exhibit (other than passive interaction like SMELL)
    is precluded entirely because someone else has vandalized the work and
    you don't want to be held responsible. Another exhibit allows for
    interaction, but not in a way that changes any text (of the descriptions
    or of the critics' reactions) -- you're told that you're altering
    things, but that's about it. The other exhibits allow for a little more
    interplay, but I left the game feeling like the most interesting aspect
    was barely there. (Perhaps the author and I differ about what the most
    interesting aspect was.)

    Credit where credit is due, though -- the artworks themselves are well
    rendered and intriguing, and the variety of perspectives you get (the
    descriptions change slightly after you've read each critic's take) is
    impressive. It's pretty clear (at least, to me) that they occupy four
    distinct categories -- one strictly aesthetic, one literally
    representational, one metaphor/symbol, and one simply abstract -- and I
    enjoyed seeing the extent to which each critic managed or failed to
    grapple with each work on its own terms; in each case, some of the
    reaction amounted to "I don't like this because of the category it's
    in." (Sorry, no points for complaining that this critic has been known
    to do the same thing.) It's also fun to see the artists gently mocking
    the whole critical enterprise. For example, one critic notes that part
    of his work wasn't originally planned, but "[t]he curator's (Hi, Mrs.
    Washington!) little boy wanted to be part of the show, so he brought me
    that part from his trainset. Congratulations, Daniel, you are officially
    [sic] an ARTISTE!" The works themselves also bear scrutiny -- in some
    cases second- and third-level nouns are available (as in, objects
    mentioned in the room description are first-level, objects mentioned in
    the descriptions of first-level objects are second-level, etc.),
    deepening the level of detail available considerably.

    Ribbons is a fifteen-minute game at most, but it's a worthwhile fifteen
    minutes. As with Exhibition, reading the critics' thoughts is far and
    away the meat of the game, but those thoughts are good enough that
    that's not faint praise.

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    From: Stas Starkov

    NAME: The Weapon
    AUTHOR: Sean Barrett
    EMAIL: buzzard SP@G world.std.com
    DATE: 2001
    PARSER: Inform Standard
    SUPPORTS: Z-code (Infocom/Inform) interpreters
    AVAILABILITY: Freeware
    URL: ftp://ftp.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/zcode/weapon.zip
    VERSION: Release 1

    Surprisingly, the game's subtitle, "an Interactive Misdirection", is
    true enough. But this game offers additional err... misdirection. Well,
    the problem is -- you don't know who you really are until the very end.
    But that's the main idea (or call it the feature) of the game.

    "The Weapon" is strongly related to the outstanding game "Spider and
    Web" by Andrew Plotkin. Both games are heavily puzzle-oriented, but more
    than that -- they both have a lot of gadgetry in their puzzles, and you
    must work out how to use that gadgetry. I'm happy to add that the
    puzzles exist not just for sake of themselves -- they are based on the
    plot.

    In addition, both games' PCs know more than the player; you must explore
    not only surrounding world, but also yourself. Or at least you must care
    about what PC says. But there is a problem in "The Weapon" -- to follow
    the hints that reveal the PC, you must pay close attention to those
    hints. Strangely, the puzzles distract you from that, and I personally
    was not able to identify myself with the PC, because it was not far
    enough from a simple, boring cardboard stereotype. That's OK in most IF
    games, those with simple plots or those that are puzzle based (take "The
    Mulldoon Legacy" by Jon Ingold for example), but, as I noted above,
    after all "The Weapon" is a story with heavy plot, based on puzzles and
    self-discovery.

    "The Weapon" features the "most appropriate" conversation system: you
    type "talk" (or just "t") and the PC considers the current situation and
    says (in fact, more often just replies) what he/she thinks the most
    appropriate answer is. Ian Finley (and before that Adam Cadre in
    "Shrapnel") used this very technique in his game "Kaged". I found the
    effect weak then, but unlike "Kaged", in "The Weapon" there are several
    reasons why the author chose to use this conversation system. First, I
    think it's impossible (or very hard) to explain to the player "what's
    going on" in the game, since the PC is so far ahead of the player right
    from the start. Well, there _are_ alternative ways to show what's going
    on, but I don't think that cut-scenes or self-dialogues are more elegant
    methods for expressing the PC's thoughts. Second, as the author said,
    "you never need to TALK to win the game", but you need to in order to
    understand the story. Third, you can ask NPCs for things and order them
    to do things in the usual way, i.e. "Cheryl, open the door" or "ask Tom
    for a knife". Fourth, the PC's remarks are quite terse and seldom go
    very far from the NPC's questions -- and that lessens the "PC commands
    player" effect.

    Puzzles in the game are logical and mostly fair. But -- you can't solve
    some of them without seeing the death messages first. That's not very
    good, but with modern "UNDO" techniques you can reach the end of the
    game without much trouble. Overall, the majority of the puzzles are
    quite easy, because you can't do a lot in any particular moment of time,
    and that's good -- I was able to concentrate on the current puzzle for a
    long time. But there are no red herrings (well, the scenery "window"
    doesn't count), and I think that's bad -- red herrings add not only
    challenge for the player, but also a time to think about the situation
    aside from its puzzles. On the other hand, all the puzzles are well
    thought-out and sufficiently beta-tested. There are a lot of messages
    for the wrong moves of puzzle solving, and no technical bugs, as far as
    I can tell.

    To help you in puzzle solving, the author has added built-in hints. They
    consist of many levels (i.e. each puzzle has about 15 hints) and are
    well thought-out. But not everyone loves built-in hints -- they are far
    too easily accessible (I mean, you don't need even to connect to
    Internet) to prevent their use.

    There is only one NPC in "The Weapon", I think. But as in "Spider and
    Web", she is your enemy and you're trying to outsmart her. The NPC is
    fairly well implemented, but has little dynamism. She is not cardboard,
    but you can easily confuse her with it.

    The writing in the game was not easy for my lame English (I hope you
    don't forget that I'm Russian.) -- it was too heavy and had a lot of
    specific to science words. I was able to fully understand the story only
    after my fourth time reading one particular sentence -- a really rare
    situation for me. My English is lame, as I said -- let it not distract
    you from the game. But do note that.

    Also, the game supplies a newspaper -- the usual newspaper that
    describes recent news [events]. It helps to set the mood for the game.

    Overall, "The Weapon" is well implemented and has some good puzzles, but
    it is not _long_ enough to suck players into the game, I fear. The story
    is good and made me think about it after I finished the game.

    I almost forgot to say: "The Weapon" is a one room game. It is placed in
    the very far future and centers around the space war (or around post war
    events) with aliens (there are no laughs, it's serious). Not that this
    plot was never implemented before, but it's not bad for such a short
    story. This game is worth a look.

    SCORE:
    Atmosphere: 1.3 (not enough mind sucking)
    Game-play: 1.6 (mostly fair, but nothing outstanding)
    Writing: 1.2 (good, but not great -- for me)
    Plot: 1.3 (quite novel, but short)
    Wildcard: 1.4 (for gadgetry oriented puzzles; sci-fi story)
    Total: 6.8 (not bad)
    Characters: 1.1 (not very deep)
    Puzzles: 1.4 (good enough)

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

    From: Duncan Stevens

    I don't think a definitive taxonomy of IF puzzles has been written, but
    there have been gestures in that direction, and one of the better ones
    is in the recently released fourth edition of the Inform Designer's
    Manual. Graham Nelson doesn't so much describe the essence of good
    puzzles -- for the sensible reason, I suspect, that there's no unifying
    thread that distinguishes good puzzles -- as point out some of the more
    tiresome themes in puzzle creation (as well as some underexplored puzzle
    models). The themes are instantly recognizable to the seasoned IF
    player: Get-X-Use-X, locked-door (including variants involving guardians
    who want a particular object), maze, light-source,
    capacity-and-exhaustion, etc. It's probably an oversimplification to say
    that good puzzles are those that don't fit into the familiar categories,
    but I do think it's true that, for a puzzle to be genuinely memorable,
    it either needs to be outside the canon altogether or be a truly novel
    spin on the usual patterns. The puzzles in The Weapon are of both
    varieties, and for that reason they're, for the most part, satisfying to
    solve.

    You're in the middle of a war against an alien race, with a third race
    peripherally involved, and you're helping a superior officer figure out
    how to use a mysterious weapon -- except "helping" isn't quite the word,
    because you're interested in figuring out the weapon but not entirely
    interested in enabling the officer to succeed. Accordingly, the task is
    both to decipher the gadgetry and to mislead and misdirect the officer
    looking over your shoulder. Gadgetry-deciphering is a pretty familiar
    puzzle trope, but not with this sort of spin -- and, better, the tricks
    you come up with make sense, for the most part, and change to fit the
    situation. The gadgetry itself isn't particularly exciting, really, but
    the nature of the challenge demands some creative thinking -- how do you
    vary the tricks and misdirections to avoid going to the same well too
    many times, for instance?

    There are a few flies in the ointment. The puzzles aren't easy, and
    while for the most part they're logical, they also depend to some extent
    on visualization of things that aren't quite as well described as they
    could be. In other words, the puzzles make perfect sense if you
    visualize some key objects the way the author does -- but you might not,
    and the descriptions are a little too sparse to clue you in that you
    should be seeing the objects in question another way. There's a
    comprehensive hint system, to be sure, which helps fill in the gaps, but
    it's something of a drag to wrestle with puzzles and find, when you give
    up, that the solution was something that never crossed your mind because
    you "saw" the scene the wrong way. Another puzzle, while reasonably
    logical, suffers from guess-the-verb problems, and in several cases the
    game doesn't acknowledge guesses that are on the right track. These
    aren't mortal sins, though, and I'm willing to put up with some design
    flaws for the sake of some original ideas.

    The main NPC -- the officer -- is also well rendered; most of the
    puzzles hinge on observing her behavior or guessing at her reactions,
    and for the most part she functions logically. The relationship between
    the protagonist and the NPC isn't quite as well described and leaves a
    lot of questions unanswered -- why does the officer choose someone whom
    she clearly doesn't trust? Why does she seem to trust you at some times
    -- letting seemingly interesting developments pass with no comment --
    but not at others? Still, most of the problems are relatively minor, and
    a little imagination can fill in the gaps, I suppose. There's also an
    interesting twist at one point that forces the player to reassess
    everything that's come before -- though the twist might have worked
    better if another recent game hadn't done something extremely similar.

    The best way to describe The Weapon, I think, is that the seams don't
    often show: library responses are rare, descriptions and logical
    responses are in ample supply, and most aspects of the game appear to
    have been thought through, quibbles about visualization aside. The
    HTMLized feelies enhance the feeling of professionalism, though there
    isn't a lot to them; they're not as slickly done as Infocom's feelies,
    but they're well designed and suggest that the author took more than the
    usual pains to set the scene. The puzzles may not be everyone's cup of
    tea, but on the whole it's likely that the player will be reacting to
    the puzzles themselves (and to the concept), not to inadequate
    implementation thereof. Admittedly, it's not a long game -- four
    puzzles, by my count, and I did find some flaws even in those four
    puzzles -- but the flaws aren't fundamental tragic flaws, and many
    probably wouldn't consider them flaws at all (or wouldn't encounter the
    same problems). The writing, similarly, is unspectacular but effective
    -- it's strictly functional, doesn't try for splashy effects or clever
    dialogue, and never gets in the way of the game. The experience is
    rarely spectacular but almost never outright disappointing.

    The Weapon is intelligently done, and done with care; it may not set the
    IF world on fire, but it doesn't do much wrong.

    READERS' SCOREBOARD -------------------------------------------------------

    The Readers' Scoreboard is an ongoing feature of SPAG. It charts the
    scores that SPAG readers and reviewers have given to various IF games
    since SPAG started up. The codes in the Notes column give information as
    to a game's availability and the platforms on which it runs. For a
    translation of these codes and for more detailed information on the
    scoreboard's format, see the SPAG FAQ. This FAQ is available at the
    ftp.ifarchive.org IF-archive or on the SPAG web page at
    http://www.sparkynet.com/spag. Note that starting with this issue, the
    GMD code has been replaced with ARC.

    Name                   Avg Sc     Chr     Puz # Sc  Issue Notes:
    ====                   ======     ===     === ====  ===== ======
    1-2-3...                  4.1     0.9     0.5    3     23 F_INF_ARC
    9:05                      6.4     0.7     0.6    9     20 F_INF_ARC
    Aayela                    7.4     1.2     1.5    5     10 F_TAD_ARC
    Abbey                     6.8     0.6     1.4    1     24 S10_I_ARC
    Above and Beyond          7.3     1.5     1.6    5     24 F_TAD_ARC
    Acid Whiplash             5.1     0.6     0.2    4     17 F_INF_ARC
    Acorn Court               6.1     0.5     1.5    2     12 F_INF_ARC
    Ad Verbum                 7.4     0.9     1.7    3     23 F_INF_ARC
    Adv. of Elizabeth Hig     3.1     0.5     0.3    2      5 F_AGT_ARC
    Adventure (all varian     6.0     0.5     1.1   13   8,22 F_ETC_ARC
    Adventureland             4.4     0.5     1.1    6        F_INF_ARC
    Adventures of Helpful     7.0     1.3     0.9    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Aftermath                 4.0     0.7     0.7    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Afternoon Visit           4.1     1.0     0.8    1        F_AGT
    Aisle                     6.8     1.4     0.3   10     18 F_INF_ARC
    Alien Abduction?          7.5     1.3     1.4    5 10, 26 F_TAD_ARC
    All Alone                 8.2     1.3     0.7    2     22 F_TAD_ARC
    All Quiet...Library       5.0     0.9     0.9    6      7 F_INF_ARC
    Amnesia                   6.9     1.5     1.3    4      9 C_AP_I_64
    Anchorhead                8.7     1.7     1.5   28     18 F_INF_ARC
    And The Waves...          7.9     1.5     1.1    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Another...No Beer         2.4     0.2     0.8    2      4 S10_I_ARC
    Arrival                   7.9     1.3     1.4    5     17 F_TAD_ARC
    Arthur: Excalibur         8.0     1.3     1.6    44,14,22 C_INF
    Asendent                  1.7     0.0     0.3    1        F_INF_ARC
    At Wit's End              7.1     1.2     1.3    1     23 F_TAD_ARC
    Augmented Fourth          7.9     1.2     1.6    7     22 F_INF_ARC
    Aunt Nancy's House        1.3     0.1     0.0    2        F_INF_ARC
    Awakened                  7.7     1.7     1.6    1
    Awakening                 5.6     0.9     1.1    2  15,18 F_INF_ARC
    Awe-Chasm                 3.0     0.7     0.7    2      8 S_I_ST_ARC
    Babel                     8.4     1.7     1.3   10     13 F_INF_ARC
    Balances                  6.6     0.7     1.2    9      6 F_INF_ARC
    Ballyhoo                  7.3     1.5     1.5    6      4 C_INF
    Bear's Night Out          7.3     1.1     1.3    7     13 F_INF_ARC
    Beat The Devil            5.5     1.2     1.1    4     19 F_INF_ARC
    Being Andrew Plotkin      7.5     1.5     1.1    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Best Man                  5.2     0.8     1.2    2        F_INF_ARC
    Beyond the Tesseract      3.7     0.1     0.6    1      6 F_I_ARC
    Beyond Zork               7.7     1.5     1.7   10  5, 14 C_INF
    Big Mama                  5.4     1.2     0.6    3     23 F_INF_ARC
    BJ Drifter                6.5     1.2     1.2    5     15 F_INF_ARC
    Bliss                     6.3     1.1     0.8    4     20 F_TAD_ARC
    Bloodline                 7.7     1.4     1.1    2     15 F_INF_ARC
    Border Zone               7.2     1.4     1.4    7      4 C_INF
    Breakers                  7.5     1.5     1.1    1        C_I_AP_M_64_S
    Break-In                  6.1     1.1     1.4    3     21 F_INF_ARC
    Breaking The Code         0.4     0.0     0.0    2        F_INF_ARC
    Brimstone: The Dream.     6.5     1.4     1.1    1        C_I_AP_M_64_S
    Broken String             3.9     0.7     0.4    4        F_TADS_ARC
    BSE                       5.7     0.9     1.0    3        F_INF_ARC
    Bureaucracy               6.9     1.5     1.4   12      5 C_INF
    Busted                    5.1     1.1     0.9    2     25 F_INF_ARC
    Calliope                  4.7     0.9     0.8    3        F_INF_ARC
    Cask                      1.5     0.0     0.5    2        F_INF_ARC
    Castaway                  1.1     0.0     0.4    1      5 F_I_ARC
    Castle Amnos              4.6     1.0     0.8    2        F_INF_ARC
    Castle Elsinore           4.3     0.7     1.0    2        I_ARC
    Cattus Atrox              4.9     1.2     0.8    1     17 F_INF_ARC
    CC                        4.2     0.4     1.0    1        F_ALAN_ARC
    Change in the Weather     7.5     1.0     1.3   14 7,8,14 F_INF_ARC
    Chaos                     5.6     1.3     1.1    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Chicken under Window      6.6     0.8     0.3    4        F_INF_ARC
    Chicks Dig Jerks          5.2     1.1     0.7    9     19 F_INF_ARC
    Chico and I Ran           7.2     1.7     1.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Christminster             8.3     1.6     1.6   21     20 F_INF_ARC
    Circus                    3.4     0.5     0.8    1
    City                      6.1     0.6     1.3    2     17 F_INF_ARC
    Clock                     3.7     0.8     0.6    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Coke Is It!               5.6     1.0     0.9    3        F_INF_ARC
    Coming Home               0.6     0.1     0.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Common Ground             7.1     1.6     0.3    3     20 F_TAD_ARC
    Commute                   1.3     0.2     0.1    1        F_I_ARC
    Comp00ter Game            0.9     0.1     0.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Congratulations!          2.6     0.7     0.3    1        F_INF_ARC
    Corruption                7.2     1.6     1.0    4 14, 21 C_MAG
    Cosmoserve                7.8     1.4     1.4    5      5 F_AGT_ARC
    Cove                      6.5     0.8     0.7    4     22 F_INF_ARC
    Crimson Spring            6.9     1.5     1.2    1        F_HUG_ARC
    Crypt v2.0                5.0     1.0     1.5    1      3 S12_IBM_ARC
    Curses                    8.0     1.2     1.7   20  2, 22 F_INF_ARC
    Cutthroats                5.7     1.3     1.1    9      1 C_INF
    Dampcamp                  5.0     0.8     1.1    3        F_TAD_ARC
    Danger! Adventurer...     3.2     0.3     0.7    1        F_INF_ARC
    Dangerous Curves          8.6     1.5     1.6    1     24 F_INF_ARC
    Day For Soft Food         6.8     1.0     1.3    5     19 F_INF_ARC
    Deadline                  6.9     1.3     1.3    9     20 C_INF
    Death To My Enemies       4.4     0.9     0.7    4        F_INF_ARC
    Deep Space Drifter        5.6     0.4     1.1    3      3 S15_TAD_ARC
    Deephome                  4.0     0.5     0.9    2     21 F_INF_ARC
    Degeneracy                8.7     1.5     1.3    1     25 F_INF_ARC
    Delusions                 7.9     1.5     1.5    5     14 F_INF_ARC
    Demon's Tomb              7.4     1.2     1.1    2      9 C_I
    Desert Heat               6.0     1.3     0.7    1     23 F_TAD_ARC
    Detective                 1.0     0.0     0.0    9 4,5,18 F_AGT_INF_ARC
    Detective-MST3K           6.0     1.2     0.2   10 7,8,18 F_INF_ARC
    Dinner With Andre         7.2     1.6     1.4    1     23 F_INF_ARC
    Ditch Day Drifter         6.3     0.9     1.6    5      2 F_TAD_ARC
    Djinni Chronicles         7.1     1.1     1.1    3     23 F_INF_ARC
    Down                      6.0     1.0     1.2    1     14 F_HUG_ARC
    Downtown Tokyo            6.1     0.9     1.0    6     17 F_INF_ARC
    Dungeon                   6.2     1.0     1.6    3        F_ARC
    Dungeon Adventure         6.8     1.3     1.6    1      4 F_ETC
    Dungeon of Dunjin         6.0     0.7     1.5    5  3, 14 S20_IBM_MAC_ARC
    Edifice                   8.0     1.4     1.8   10     13 F_INF_ARC
    Electrabot                0.7     0.0     0.0    1      5 F_AGT_ARC
    E-Mailbox                 3.1     0.1     0.2    2        F_AGT_ARC
    Emy Discovers Life        5.0     1.1     0.8    3        F_AGT
    Enchanter                 7.3     1.1     1.5   10   2,15 C_INF
    End Means Escape          6.1     1.4     1.1    1     23 F_TAD_ARC
    Enhanced                  5.0     1.0     1.3    2      2 S10_TAD_ARC
    Enlightenment             6.5     1.1     1.5    3     17 F_INF_ARC
    Erehwon                   6.2     1.2     1.5    4     19 F_TAD_ARC
    Eric the Unready          7.4     1.4     1.4    6        C_I
    Essex                     5.7     1.2     0.9    1        C_I_AP_M_64_ST
    Everybody Loves a Par     7.0     1.2     1.2    3     12 F_TAD_ARC
    Exhibition                6.2     1.4     0.3    6     19 F_TAD_ARC
    Fable                     2.0     0.1     0.1    3      6 F_AGT_ARC
    Fable-MST3K               4.0     0.5     0.2    4        F_AGT_INF_ARC
    Fear                      6.3     1.2     1.3    3 10, 24 F_INF_ARC
    Fifteen                   1.5     0.5     0.4    1     17 F_INF_ARC
    Firebird                  7.1     1.5     1.3    4     15 F_TAD_ARC
    Fish                      7.5     1.3     1.7    4 12, 14 C_MAG
    Foggywood Hijinx          6.2     1.2     1.3    3     21 F_TAD_ARC
    Foom                      6.6     1.0     1.0    1        F_TAD_ARC
    For A Change              8.0     0.9     1.3    6 19, 22 F_INF_ARC
    Forbidden Castle          4.8     0.6     0.5    1        C_AP
    Four In One               4.4     1.2     0.5    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Four Seconds              6.0     1.2     1.1    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Frenetic Five             5.3     1.4     0.5    3     13 F_TAD_ARC
    Frenetic Five 2           6.6     1.5     1.0    3 21, 22 F_TAD_ARC
    Friday Afternoon          6.3     1.4     1.2    1     13 F_INF_ARC
    Frobozz Magic Support     7.2     1.2     1.5    3        F_TAD_ARC
    Frozen                    5.5     0.7     1.3    1        F_INF_ARC
    Frustration               5.7     1.1     0.9    1     21 F_TAD_ARC
    Futz Mutz                 5.3     1.0     1.1    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Galatea                   8.1     1.9     0.9    4     22 F_INF_ARC
    Gateway                   8.6     1.4     1.8    7     11 C_I
    Gateway 2: Homeworld      9.0     1.7     1.9    6     24 C_I
    Gerbil Riot of '67        6.3     0.7     1.1    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Glowgrass                 6.9     1.3     1.3    5     13 F_INF_ARC
    Gnome Ranger              5.8     1.2     1.6    1        C_I
    Golden Fleece             6.0     1.0     1.1    1     21 F_TAD_ARC
    Golden Wombat of Dest     6.3     0.7     1.1    1     18 F_I_ARC
    Good Breakfast            4.9     0.9     1.2    2     14 F_INF_ARC
    Got ID?                   6.2     1.4     1.0    1        F_INF_ARC
    Great Archeolog. Race     6.5     1.0     1.5    1      3 S20_TAD_ARC
    Guardians of Infinity     8.5             1.3    1      9 C_I
    Guess The Verb!           6.5     1.2     1.4    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Guild of Thieves          6.9     1.2     1.5    4     14 C_MAG
    Guilty Bastards           6.9     1.4     1.2    5     22 F_HUG_ARC
    Guitar...Immortal Bar     3.0     0.0     0.0    1        F_INF_ARC
    Gumshoe                   6.2     1.0     1.1    7      9 F_INF_ARC
    Halothane                 6.6     1.3     1.2    4     19 F_INF_ARC
    Happy Ever After          4.6     0.5     1.2    1        F_INF_ARC
    HeBGB Horror              5.7     0.9     1.1    2        F_ALAN_ARC
    Heist                     6.7     1.4     1.5    2        F_INF_ARC
    Hero, Inc.                6.8     1.0     1.5    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Hitchhiker's Guide        7.3     1.3     1.5   16      5 C_INF
    Hobbit - The True Sto     5.9     1.1     0.8    1     26 S10_I_ARC
    Hollywood Hijinx          6.3     0.9     1.5   12        C_INF
    Holy Grail                6.2     0.9     1.2    1     21 F_TAD_ARC
    Horror of Rylvania        7.2     1.4     1.4    5      1 F_TAD_ARC
    Horror30.zip              3.7     0.3     0.7    2      3 S20_I_ARC
    Human Resources Stori     0.9     0.0     0.1    2     17 F_INF_ARC
    Humbug                    7.4     1.6     1.3    4 11, 24 F_I_ARC
    Hunter, In Darkness       7.3     0.9     1.4    7     19 F_INF_ARC
    I didn't know...yodel     4.0     0.7     1.0    5     17 F_I_ARC
    I-0: Jailbait on Inte     7.7     1.5     1.2   20     20 F_INF_ARC
    Ice Princess              7.5     1.4     1.6    2        A_INF_ARC
    In The End                4.8     0.6     0.2    3     10 F_INF_ARC
    In The Spotlight          3.2     0.2     1.0    2     17 F_INF_ARC
    Infidel                   6.9     0.2     1.4   15      1 C_INF
    Infil-Traitor             2.9     0.1     0.7    1        F_I_ARC
    Informatory               5.5     0.5     1.3    1     17 F_INF_ARC
    Ingrid's Back             7.0     1.6     1.6    2        C_I
    Inheritance               5.0     0.3     1.0    3     20 F_TAD_ARC
    Inhumane                  4.4     0.3     0.9    4  9, 20 F_INF_ARC
    Intruder                  6.7     1.3     1.1    4     20 F_INF_ARC
    Jacaranda Jim             7.5     1.0     0.9    3     24 F_ARC
    Jacks...Aces To Win       7.1     1.3     1.2    3     19 F_INF_ARC
    Jarod's Journey           2.5     0.5     0.3    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Jewel of Knowledge        6.3     1.2     1.1    3     18 F_INF_ARC
    Jeweled Arena             7.0     1.4     1.3    2        AGT_ARC
    Jigsaw                    8.2     1.6     1.6   19    8,9 F_INF_ARC
    Jinxter                   6.1     0.9     1.3    3        C_MAG
    John's Fire Witch         6.5     1.0     1.5    9  4, 12 S6_TADS_ARC
    Jouney Into Xanth         5.0     1.3     1.2    1      8 F_AGT_ARC
    Journey                   7.2     1.5     1.3    5      5 C_INF
    Kaged                     6.8     1.0     1.0    3 23, 25 F_INF_ARC
    King Arthur's Night O     5.9     0.9     1.0    4     19 F_ALAN_ARC
    Kissing the Buddha's      7.9     1.8     1.5    6     10 F_TAD_ARC
    Klaustrophobia            6.4     1.1     1.3    6      1 S15_AGT_ARC
    Knight Orc                7.2     1.4     1.1    2     15 C_I
    L.U.D.I.T.E.              2.7     0.2     0.1    4        F_INF_ARC
    Lancelot                  6.9     1.4     1.2    1        C_I
    Land Beyond Picket Fe     4.8     1.2     1.2    1     10 F_I_ARC
    LASH                      7.6     1.3     1.0    5     21 F_INF_ARC
    Leather Goddesses         7.2     1.3     1.5   12      4 C_INF
    Leaves                    3.4     0.2     0.8    1     14 F_ALAN_ARC
    Legend Lives!             8.2     1.2     1.4    4      5 F_TAD_ARC
    Lesson of the Tortois     6.9     1.3     1.4    5     14 F_TAD_ARC
    Lethe Flow Phoenix        6.9     1.4     1.5    5      9 F_TAD_ARC
    Letters From Home         7.0     0.6     1.2    2        F_INF_ARC
    Life on Beal Street       5.4     1.3     0.1    3        F_TAD_ARC
    Light: Shelby's Adden     7.5     1.5     1.3    6      9 S_TAD_ARC
    Lightiania                1.9     0.2     0.4    1        F_INF_ARC
    Lists and Lists           6.3     1.3     1.1    3     10 F_INF_ARC
    Little Billy              1.1     0.4     0.0    1        F_I_ARC
    Little Blue Men           8.2     1.4     1.5   10     17 F_INF_ARC
    Lomalow                   4.6     1.0     0.6    3     19 F_INF_ARC
    Losing Your Grip          8.5     1.4     1.4    6     14 S20_TAD_ARC
    Lost New York             7.9     1.4     1.4    4 20, 26 S12_TAD_ARC
    Lost Spellmaker           6.1     1.3     1.1    4     13 F_INF_ARC
    Lunatix: Insanity Cir     5.6     1.2     1.0    3        F_I_ARC
    Lurking Horror            7.2     1.3     1.4   16    1,3 C_INF
    MacWesleyan / PC Univ     5.1     0.7     1.2    3        F_TAD_ARC
    Madame L'Estrange...      5.1     1.2     0.7    1     13 F_INF_ARC
    Magic Toyshop             5.2     1.1     1.1    5      7 F_INF_ARC
    Magic.zip                 4.5     0.5     0.5    1      3 S20_IBM_ARC
    Maiden of the Moonlig     6.4     1.3     1.5    2     10 F_TAD_ARC
    Masque of the Last...     4.7     1.1     0.8    1        F_INF_ARC
    Masquerade                7.3     1.6     1.0    1     23 F_INF_ARC
    Matter of Time            1.4     0.3     1.4    1     14 F_ALAN_ARC
    Mercy                     7.3     1.4     1.2    6     12 F_INF_ARC
    Metamorphoses             8.7     1.3     1.6    1     23 F_INF_ARC
    Meteor...Sherbet          8.0     1.5     1.6    9 10, 12 F_INF_ARC
    Mind Electric             5.2     0.6     0.9    4    7,8 F_INF_ARC
    Mind Forever Voyaging     8.4     1.4     1.0   14   5,15 C_INF
    Mindwheel                 8.5     1.6     1.5    1        C_I
    Mission                   6.0     1.2     1.4    1     21 F_TAD_ARC
    Moist                     6.4     1.3     1.1    5        F_TAD_ARC
    Moment of Hope            5.0     1.3     0.3    3     19 F_TAD_ARC
    Moonmist                  6.2     1.3     1.0   16      1 C_INF
    Mop & Murder              5.0     0.9     1.0    2      5 F_AGT_ARC
    Mother Loose              7.0     1.5     1.3    2     17 F_INF_ARC
    Mulldoon Legacy           7.4     1.2     1.8    1     24 F_INF_ARC
    Multidimen. Thief         5.6     0.5     1.3    6    2,9 S15_AGT_ARC
    Muse                      7.9     1.5     1.2    4     17 F_INF_ARC
    Music Education           3.7     1.0     0.7    3        F_INF_ARC
    My Angel                  8.2     1.8     1.4    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Myopia                    6.1     1.3     0.6    2        F_AGT_ARC
    Mystery House             4.1     0.3     0.7    1        F_AP_ARC
    Nevermore                 7.2     1.5     1.4    1     23 F_INF_ARC
    New Day                   6.6     1.4     1.1    4     13 F_INF_ARC
    Night At Computer Cen     5.2     1.0     1.0    2        F_INF_ARC
    Night at Museum Forev     4.2     0.3     1.0    4    7,8 F_TAD_ARC
    Night of... Bunnies       6.6     1.0     1.4    1        I_INF_ARC
    Nord and Bert             6.1     0.6     1.2    9      4 C_INF
    Not Just A Game           6.9     1.0     1.3    1     20 F_INF_ARC
    Not Just... Ballerina     5.3     0.8     0.9    3     20 F_INF_ARC
    Obscene...Aardvarkbar     3.2     0.6     0.6    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Odieus...Flingshot        3.3     0.4     0.7    2      5 F_INF_ARC
    Of Forms Unknown          4.5     0.7     0.5    1     10 F_INF_ARC
    Offensive Probing         4.2     0.6     0.9    1        F_INF_ARC
    On The Farm               6.5     1.6     1.2    2     19 F_TAD_ARC
    On The Other Side         2.2     0.0     0.0    1        F_I_ARC
    Once and Future           6.9     1.6     1.5    2     16 F_TAD_ARC
    One That Got Away         6.4     1.4     1.1    7    7,8 F_TAD_ARC
    Only After Dark           4.6     0.8     0.6    4        F_INF_ARC
    Oo-Topos                  5.7     0.2     1.0    1      9 C_AP_I_64
    Outsided                  2.5     0.7     0.2    2        F_INF_ARC
    Pass the Banana           2.9     0.8     0.5    3     19 F_INF_ARC
    Path to Fortune           6.6     1.5     0.9    3      9 S_INF_ARC
    Pawn                      6.3     1.1     1.3    2     12 C_MAG
    Perilous Magic            6.0     1.1     1.3    2     21 F_INF_ARC
    Perseus & Andromeda       3.5     0.4     0.9    2        64_INF_ARC
    Persistence of Memory     6.2     1.2     1.1    1     17 F_HUG_ARC
    Phlegm                    5.2     1.2     1.0    2     10 F_INF_ARC
    Photopia                  7.4     1.5     0.7   27     17 F_INF_ARC
    Phred Phontious...Piz     5.2     0.9     1.3    2     13 F_INF_ARC
    Pickpocket                4.1     0.6     0.8    1        F_INF_ARC
    Piece of Mind             6.3     1.3     1.4    1     10 F_INF_ARC
    Pintown                   1.3     0.3     0.2    1        F_INF_ARC
    Pirate's Cove             4.8     0.6     0.6    1        F_INF_ARC
    Planet of Infinite Mi     6.8     1.1     1.3    1     23 F_TAD_ARC
    Planetfall                7.3     1.6     1.4   13      4 C_INF
    Plant                     7.3     1.2     1.5    4     17 F_TAD_ARC
    Plundered Hearts          7.4     1.4     1.3   11      4 C_INF
    Poor Zefron's Almanac     5.6     1.0     1.3    3     13 F_TAD_ARC
    Portal                    8.0     1.7     0.2    3        C_I_A_AP_64
    Prodly The Puffin         5.8     1.3     1.1    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Punk Points               6.4     1.4     1.3    1        F_INF_ARC
    Purple                    5.6     0.9     1.0    1     17 F_INF_ARC
    Pyramids of Mars          5.8     1.2     1.1    2     24 AGT_ARC
    Quarterstaff              6.1     1.3     0.6    1      9 C_M
    Ralph                     7.1     1.6     1.2    3 10, 25 F_INF_ARC
    Rameses                   8.0     1.6     0.4    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Rematch                   7.9     1.5     1.6    1     22 F_TAD_ARC
    Remembrance               2.7     0.8     0.2    3        F_ARC
    Reruns                    5.2     1.2     1.2    1        AGT_ARC
    Research Dig              4.8     1.1     0.8    2     17 F_INF_ARC
    Revenger                  4.2     0.8     0.5    1        F_INF_ARC
    Reverberations            5.6     1.3     1.1    1     10 F_INF_ARC
    Ritual of Purificatio     7.0     1.6     1.1    4     17 F_ARC
    Saied                     4.6     1.0     0.2    1     15 F_INF_ARC
    Sanity Claus              7.5     0.3     0.6    2      1 S10_AGT_ARC
    Save Princeton            5.6     1.0     1.3    5      8 S10_TAD_ARC
    Scapeghost                8.1     1.7     1.5    1      6 C_I
    Sea Of Night              5.7     1.3     1.1    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Seastalker                5.2     1.1     0.8   11      4 C_INF
    Shade                     8.5     0.7     1.0    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Shades of Grey            7.8     1.3     1.3    6   2, 8 F_AGT_ARC
    Sherlock                  7.0     1.3     1.4    5      4 C_INF
    She's Got a Thing...S     7.0     1.7     1.6    3     13 F_INF_ARC
    Shogun                    7.0     1.2     0.6    2      4 C_INF
    Shrapnel                  7.1     1.3     0.5    6     20 F_INF_ARC
    Simple Theft              5.8     1.3     0.8    1     20 F_TAD_ARC
    Sins against Mimesis      5.5     1.0     1.2    3     13 F_INF_ARC
    Sir Ramic... Gorilla      6.0     1.2     1.2    2      6 F_AGT_ARC
    Six Stories               6.3     1.0     1.2    4     19 F_TAD_ARC
    Skyranch                  2.8     0.5     0.7    1     20 F_I_ARC
    Small World               6.2     1.3     1.1    3 10, 24 F_TAD_ARC
    So Far                    8.0     1.1     1.4   13 12, 25 F_INF_ARC
    Sorcerer                  7.2     0.6     1.6    7   2,15 C_INF
    Sound of... Clapping      7.1     1.3     1.3    8      5 F_ADVSYS_ARC
    South American Trek       0.9     0.2     0.5    1      5 F_IBM_ARC
    Space Aliens...Cardig     1.5     0.4     0.3    6   3, 4 S60_AGT_ARC
    Space under Window        7.1     0.9     0.4    6     12 F_INF_ARC
    Spacestation              5.6     0.7     1.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Spellbreaker              8.5     1.2     1.8    8   2,15 C_INF
    Spellcasting 101          7.4     1.1     1.5    4        C_I
    Spellcasting 201          7.8     1.6     1.7    2        C_I
    Spellcasting 301          6.0     1.2     1.2    2        C_I
    Spider and Web            8.6     1.7     1.7   18     14 F_INF_ARC
    SpiritWrak                6.7     1.2     1.3    6     22 F_INF_ARC
    Spodgeville...Wossnam     4.3     0.7     1.2    2        F_INF_ARC
    Spur                      7.1     1.3     1.1    2      9 F_HUG_ARC
    Spyder and Jeb            6.2     1.1     1.4    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Starcross                 6.6     1.0     1.2    7      1 C_INF
    Stargazer                 5.4     1.1     1.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Stationfall               7.7     1.6     1.5    7      5 C_INF
    Statuette                 3.7     0.0     0.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Stiffy                    0.6     0.0     0.0    1        F_INF_ARC
    Stiffy - MiSTing          4.4     1.0     0.4    6        F_INF_ARC
    Stone Cell                6.0     1.1     1.0    3     19 F_TAD_ARC
    Stranded                  6.4     1.4     1.5    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Strange Odyssey           4.0     0.0     1.0    1
    Strangers In The Nigh     3.2     0.7     0.6    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Stupid Kittens            2.9     0.6     0.4    2        F_INF_ARC
    Sunset Over Savannah      8.7     1.7     1.4    6     13 F_TAD_ARC
    Suspect                   6.2     1.3     1.1    8      4 C_INF
    Suspended                 7.7     1.5     1.4    8      8 C_INF
    Sylenius Mysterium        4.7     1.2     1.1    1     13 F_INF_ARC
    Symetry                   1.1     0.1     0.1    2        F_INF_ARC
    Tapestry                  7.1     1.4     0.9    5 10, 14 F_INF_ARC
    Tempest                   5.3     1.4     0.6    3     13 F_INF_ARC
    Temple of the Orc Mag     4.5     0.1     0.8    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Terror of Mecha Godzi     4.6     0.8     0.6    1     26 S10_I_ARC
    Textfire Golf             7.1     1.3     0.4    2     25 F_INF_ARC
    Theatre                   7.0     1.1     1.3   13      6 F_INF_ARC
    Thorfinn's Realm          3.5     0.5     0.7    2        F_INF_ARC
    Threading the Labyrin     1.9     0.0     0.0    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Time: All Things...       3.9     1.2     0.9    2 11, 12 F_INF_ARC
    TimeQuest                 8.0     1.2     1.6    4        C_I
    TimeSquared               4.3     1.1     1.1    1        F_AGT_ARC
    Toonesia                  5.8     1.1     1.1    6  7, 21 F_TAD_ARC
    Tossed into Space         3.9     0.2     0.6    1      4 F_AGT_ARC
    Town Dragon               3.9     0.8     0.3    2 14, 22 F_INF_ARC
    Transfer                  7.6     1.0     1.6    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Trapped...Dilly           5.1     0.1     1.1    2     17 F_INF_ARC
    Travels in Land of Er     6.1     1.2     1.5    2     14 F_INF_ARC
    Trinity                   8.7     1.4     1.7   18    1,2 C_INF
    Trip                      5.4     1.2     1.1    2        F_TAD_ARC
    Tryst of Fate             7.1     1.4     1.3    1     11 F_INF_ARC
    Tube Trouble              4.2     0.8     0.7    2      8 F_INF_ARC
    Tyler's Great Cube Ga     5.8     0.0     1.7    1        S_TAD_ARC
    Uncle Zebulon's Will      7.3     1.0     1.5   12      8 F_TAD_ARC
    Underoos That Ate NY      4.5     0.6     0.9    3        F_TAD_INF_ARC
    Undertow                  5.4     1.3     0.9    3      8 F_TAD_ARC
    Undo                      2.9     0.5     0.7    4      7 F_TAD_ARC
    Unholy Grail              6.0     1.2     1.2    1     13 F_I_ARC
    Unnkulian One-Half        6.7     1.2     1.5    9      1 F_TAD_ARC
    Unnkulian Unventure 1     6.9     1.2     1.5    8    1,2 F_TAD_ARC
    Unnkulian Unventure 2     7.2     1.2     1.5    5      1 F_TAD_ARC
    Unnkulian Zero            8.4     0.7     0.8    21,12,14 F_TAD_ARC
    Varicella                 8.2     1.6     1.5    9     18 F_INF_ARC
    Veritas                   6.6     1.3     1.4    4        S10_TAD_ARC
    Vindaloo                  2.9     0.0     0.4    1        F_INF_ARC
    VirtuaTech                6.1     0.0     1.2    1        F_TAD_ARC
    VOID: Corporation         3.2     0.4     0.8    1        F_AGT_ARC
    Water Bird                5.0     1.1     0.8    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Waystation                5.5     0.7     1.0    4      9 F_TAD_ARC
    Weapon                    6.8     1.1     1.4    1     26 F_INF_ARC
    Wearing the Claw          6.5     1.2     1.2    7 10, 18 F_INF_ARC
    Wedding                   7.4     1.6     1.3    3     12 F_INF_ARC
    What-IF?                  1.6     0.0     0.0    2        F_INF_ARC
    Where Evil Dwells         5.1     0.8     1.1    1        F_INF_ARC
    Winchester's Nightmar     6.9     1.5     0.5    1     22 F_INF_ARC
    Winter Wonderland         7.6     1.3     1.2    7     19 F_INF_ARC
    Wishbringer               7.6     1.3     1.3   16    5,6 C_INF
    Withdrawal Symptoms       4.4     0.5     0.7    1        F_INF_ARC
    Witness                   6.7     1.5     1.2   10  1,3,9 C_INF
    Wizard of Akyrz           3.2     0.3     0.8    1
    Wonderland                6.4     1.4     1.1    3        C_MAG
    World                     6.5     0.6     1.3    2      4 F_I_ETC_ARC
    Worlds Apart              7.8     1.7     1.4    9     21 F_TAD_ARC
    YAGWAD                    6.7     1.1     1.3    2     23 F_INF_ARC
    Your Choice               5.5     0.0     1.1    1        F_TAD_ARC
    Zanfar                    2.6     0.2     0.4    1      8 F_AGT_ARC
    Zero Sum Game             7.2     1.5     1.5    3     13 F_INF_ARC
    Zombie!                   5.2     1.2     1.1    2     13 F_TAD_ARC
    Zork 0                    6.3     1.0     1.5   10     14 C_INF
    Zork 1                    6.1     0.8     1.4   24  1, 12 C_INF
    Zork 2                    6.4     1.0     1.5   13  1, 12 C_INF
    Zork 3                    6.5     0.9     1.4    8  1, 12 C_INF
    Zork Undisc. Undergr.     5.9     0.9     1.1    3     14 F_INF_ARC
    Zork: A Troll's Eye V     4.4     0.6     0.1    3     14 F_INF_ARC
    Zuni Doll                 4.0     0.6     0.9    2     14 F_INF_ARC

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    The Top Ten:

    A game is not eligible for the Top Ten unless it has received at least
    three ratings from different readers. This is to ensure a more
    democratic and accurate depiction of the best games.

    A less-than-impressive 32 ratings have been submitted since the last
    issue, leaving me to wonder aloud whether the scoreboard has outlived
    its usefulness. Movement in the top ten has been subtle, but extant:
    Anchorhead slips two slots to number 4, while Spider and Web has gotten
    a leg up on Gateway and Losing Your Grip.

    1.  Gateway 2: Homeworld  9.0   6 votes
    2.  Sunset over Savannah  8.7   6 votes
    3.  Trinity               8.7   18 votes
    4.  Anchorhead            8.7   28 votes
    5.  Spider and Web        8.6   18 votes
    6.  Gateway               8.6   7 votes
    7.  Losing Your Grip      8.5   6 votes
    8.  Spellbreaker          8.5   8 votes
    9.  Babel                 8.4   10 votes
    10. Mind Forever Voyaging 8.4   14 votes

    As always, please remember that the scoreboard is only as good as the
    contributions it receives. To make your mark on this vast morass of
    statistics, rate some games on our website
    (http://www.sparkynet.com/spag). You can also, if you like, send ratings
    directly to me at obrian SP@G colorado.edu. Instructions for how the rating
    system works are in the SPAG FAQ, available from the IF Archive and from
    our website. Please read the FAQ before submitting scores, so that you
    understand how the scoring system works. After that, submit away!

    SUBMISSION POLICY ---------------------------------------------------------

    SPAG is a non-paying fanzine specializing in reviews of text adventure
    games, a.k.a. Interactive Fiction. This includes the classic Infocom
    games and similar games, but also some graphic adventures where the
    primary player-game communication is text based. Any and all text-based
    games are eligible for review, though if a game has been reviewed three
    times in SPAG, no further reviews of it will be accepted unless they are
    extraordinarily original and/or insightful. SPAG reviews should be free
    of spoilers.

    Authors retain the rights to use their reviews in other contexts. We
    accept submissions that have been previously published elsewhere,
    although original reviews are preferred.

    For a more detailed version of this policy, see the SPAG FAQ at
    http://www.sparkynet.com/spag/spag.faq.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Thank you for helping to keep text adventures alive!

Click here for a printable, plain text version of this issue.