RSS

Hunt the Wumpus, Part 2

To hear Gregory Yob tell it, Hunt the Wumpus was as much inspired by his hatred of the Cartesian grid employed by Hurkle and similar games as it was by anything else. Yob wanted to make a monster-seeking game based on the dodecahedron, his “favorite Platonic solid.” I must say my own interest in geometry is limited enough that it’s hard for me to share Yob’s passion; certainly I lack a “favorite Platonic solid” to compare with Yob’s. I’m more interested in the other innovations Yob deployed on the way to implementing his dodecahedron.

Hunt the Wumpus is the origin point of all those twisty little passages that would be filling so many computer screens and graph-paper pads just a few years after its creation. Its world consists of a grid of twenty rooms, each of which is connected to exactly three other rooms. Some of these rooms have contents, which are randomly placed before each play: bottomless pits that result in instant death, “super bats” that carry the player to another (random) room, and of course the wumpus himself. If the player walks in on him, he has a 75% chance of merely wandering off to another room, but a 25% chance of eating her up right there. The wumpus can be killed only remotely, by firing an arrow from elsewhere into the room that contains him. The game in fact understands just two verbs: “move” and “shoot.” Gameplay, at least if you’re a cautious (not to say callow) sort like me, consists of moving carefully around the storyworld constructing a map of its rooms, connections, and hazards, and finally moving into position to take the kill shot against the poor wumpus. On the terminal, it looks like this:

HUNT THE WUMPUS

YOU ARE IN ROOM  20   
TUNNELS LEAD TO  13    16    19   

SHOOT OR MOVE (S-M)?M
WHERE TO?13

I FEEL A DRAFT
YOU ARE IN ROOM  13   
TUNNELS LEAD TO  12    14    20   

SHOOT OR MOVE (S-M)?M
WHERE TO?20

YOU ARE IN ROOM  20   
TUNNELS LEAD TO  13    16    19   

SHOOT OR MOVE (S-M)?


Okay, so it’s not too much to look at. When you play it for the first time, you might end up asking if that’s really all there is. Still, if you give it a decent chance you’ll find a well-constructed little game that can still be engaging, at least for the first few plays as you sort out how it works and how to beat it. From a design perspective, it’s biggest flaw is perhaps that you can often begin with a configuration like this:

I FEEL A DRAFT
YOU ARE IN ROOM  4    
TUNNELS LEAD TO  3     5     14


The draft tells you that you are adjacent to a pit; one of those three tunnels, in other words, leads to death. Because you have not yet had a chance to gather any additional information, you are left to rely on blind chance. You must just pick one and hope for the best — hardly a fair situation.

But I’m not so interested in “pure” game design as I am in the history of ludic narrative. From that perspective, Hunt the Wumpus is hugely important in two ways.

First, it represents a radical change in perspective from games like Hurkle. While the player viewed those games from on-high, Wumpus places her in its storyworld. You are there, creeping from room to room in the darkness. Wumpus offers the merest stub of a narrative, but that stub combined with the switch from a third-person to a first-person perspective gives it a very different feel from Hurkle and its companions. Those games feel like abstractions; Wumpus is a much more immersive experience. It wasn’t quite the first game to put its player inside a storyworld — The Oregon Trail, at least, proceeded Wumpus by about a year and was possessed of a much more full-bodied narrative in addition — but it’s nevertheless a significant departure from the norm of its time.

Second, and even more importantly, Wumpus is a prototype version of the system of geography that is still with IF today: a set of discrete, self-contained rooms linked together by connectors the player can use to pass from one to another. Compass directions are not yet here, but the rest of the scheme is. Wumpus is all about mapping. The early IF games that would follow were continuing its tradition in being full of those twisty little passages that so frustrate modern players who try to go back to them today. This brings up a point that I’ve only recently started to grasp: the earliest IF was about geography and mapping more so than story or even puzzles. (I want to talk about the original Adventure just a bit after I finish up with Wumpus. I’ll have more to say about this idea then.)

Like The Oregon Trail, all signs point to Hunt the Wumpus having been originally written in HP Time-Shared BASIC. I was able to locate it along with its monster-hunting predecessors on tapes preserved by Bob Brown and Michael Gemeny of the HP-2000 Yahoo! Group. Its BASIC code was first published in a mid-1973 issue of the People’s Computer Company magazine, and later appeared in the October, 1975, issue of Creative Computing. The program that appeared there is almost identical to that which we found on the tape, with the only notable difference being some REM and PRINT statements found in the printed version that attribute it to Yob and plug Wumpus 2 and Wumpus 3, two sequels Yob had written by that time.

Unlike The Oregon Trail, which remained quite firmly under the thumb of MECC and was apparently spread only to educational institutions, Wumpus quickly spawned heaps of ports and adaptations on almost every viable computing platform of its era (and of every era since). By the time it appeared in Creative Computing Yob could write that, “I have reports of Wumpus written in RPG, a listing of one in FORTRAN, a rumor of a system command of ‘to Wumpus on a large corporation’s R&D computer system and have even seen an illustrated version for the Hazeltine CRT terminal!!” It was interesting enough as a game to cross the cultural boundaries that normally kept the cheerful BASIC hippies of PCC and Creative Computing separated from the world of the hardcore institutional hacker. At least by the 1975 release of Unix Version 6 (and quite possibly earlier), Wumpus had been ported to Unix C; a comment in the source cheerfully declares it “stolen from PCC Vol. 2 No. 1.”

Thanks to Bob Brown, you can experience the original version of this relic in its original environment if you’d like, as well as its immediate predecessors Hurkle, Snark, and Mugwump. Here’s what you need to do. (Yes, this is largely the same drill used to access The Oregon Trail on the same system.)

1. Telnet to mickey.publicvm.com. (Telnet, mind you. None of that newfangled SSH!)
2. Slowly alternate CTL-J and CTL-M until you see a “PLEASE LOG IN” message.
3. Enter “HEL-T001,HP2000,1″. Without the quotes, of course — and note that those are zeroes. Oh, and the system isn’t case-sensitive, but for the authentic experience you might want to have your caps lock on.
4. Enter “GET-WUMPUS” for Hunt the Wumpus; “GET-HURKLE” for HURKLE; “GET-SNARK” for Snark; or “GET-MUGWMP” for Mugwump.
5. “LIST” the program if you like, or just “RUN” it.

Have fun!

 

Tags: ,

Hunt the Wumpus, Part 1

At the height of the hippie era, two fellows named Bob Albrecht and Leroy Finkel founded the publishing company Dymax in San Francisco to write books about BASIC. Yet Albrecht in particular had ambitions that went beyond merely selling books about computers. In those days computers were still the stuff of science fiction: huge, sinister machines that were always going haywire and causing Captain Kirk all sorts of problems. For this to change and for Albrecht’s dreams of computers as tools of fun and creativity to be realized, people needed access.

Albrecht, apparently a very charismatic and persuasive man, managed to wheedle a physical PDP-8 out of DEC and a remote terminal connection and an allotment of shared computing time out of HP. He soon turned Dymax’s Menlo Park offices into a sort of computing open house, where anyone could drop in and just play with the machines. By 1972 the for-profit publisher Dymax had spun off a very different institution Albrecht named The People’s Computer Company. PCC was not really a company at all — or at least not a company terribly interested in actually making money. Its name was in fact inspired by Big Brother and the Holding Company, the late-60s band that boasted one Janis Joplin as its singer, and this fact shows where its heart really lay. San Francisco was still largely living the hippie dream in 1972, even if some of the luster had begun to fade post-Altamont, and Albrecht and PCC fit right in with the counterculture there. Their mission was bring computers to the people, which they accomplished not only through their open house but also through a newsletter whose first issue appeared in October of 1972. Its banner read: “Computers are mostly used against people instead of for people. Used to control people instead of to free them. Time to change all that. We need a… People’s Computer Company.”

The atmosphere at the Menlo Park office was described in this way by Steven Levy in Hackers:

The air was usually filled with the clatter of terminals, one hooked to the PDP-8, another connected to the telephone lines, through which it could access a computer at Hewlett-Packard, which had donated free time to PCC. More likely than not, someone would be playing one of the games that the growing group of PCC hackers had written. Sometimes housewives would bring their kids in, try the computers themselves, and get hooked, programming so much that husbands worried that the local matriarchs were abandoning children and kitchen for the joys of BASIC. Some businessmen tried to program the computer to predict stock prices, and spent infinite amounts of time on that chimera. When you had a computer center with the doors wide open, anything could happen. Albrecht was quoted in the Saturday Review as saying, “We want to start friendly neighborhood computer centers, where people can walk in like they do in a bowling alley or penny arcade and find out how to have fun with computers.”

This was the environment that the 27-year-old Gregory Yob wandered into one day, probably around the time that that landmark first issue of PCC’s magazine was being published. At the time a certain collection of grid-based guessing games written by Albrecht himself was popular there. Hurkle was probably the first of the kind:

RUN
HURKLE

WANT THE RULES?Y
A HURKLE IS HIDING IN A GRID, LIKE THE ONE BELOW.


                          NORTH

               9    . . . . . . . . . .
               8    . . . . . . . . . .
               7    . . . . . . . . . .
               6    . . . . . . . . . .
               5    . . . . . . . . . .
        WEST   4    . . . . . . . . . .   EAST
               3    . . . . . . . . . .
               2    . . . . . . . . . .
               1    . . . . . . . . . .
               0    . . . . . . . . . .

                    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

                          SOUTH

TRY TO GUESS WHERE THE HURKLE IS HIDING. YOU GUESS
BY TELLING ME THE GRIDPOINT WHERE YOU THINK THAT
THE HURKLE IS HIDING. HOMEBASE IS POINT  0,0  IN
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. YOUR GUESS SHOULD BE A PAIR
OF WHOLE NUMBERS, SEPARATED BY A COMMA. THE FIRST
NUMBER TELLS HOW FAR TO THE RIGHT OF HOMEBASE AND
THE SECOND NUMBER TELLS HOW FAR ABOVE HOMEBASE YOU
THINK THE HURKLE IS HIDING. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU 
THINK THE HURKLE IS 7 TO THE RIGHT AND 5 ABOVE
HOMEBASE, YOU ENTER  7,5  AS YOUR GUESS AND THEN
PRESS THE 'RETURN' KEY. AFTER EACH GUESS, I WILL
TELL YOU THE APPROXIMATE DIRECTION TO GO FOR YOUR
NEXT GUESS. GOOD LUCK!

THE HURKLE IS HIDING - TRY TO FIND HIM!

WHAT IS YOUR GUESS?5,5
GO NORTH

WHAT IS YOUR GUESS?5,2
GO NORTH

WHAT IS YOUR GUESS?5,1
GO NORTH

WHAT IS YOUR GUESS?5,0
GO NORTH

WHAT IS YOUR GUESS?5,8

YOU FOUND HIM IN 5    GUESSES!!!
LET'S PLAY AGAIN.


Later variants made things a little more complicated: in Snark, one must enter the radius of a circle around a central gridpoint to be informed whether the snark is inside or outside, while Mugwump (the most difficult) tells only how far in a direct line the mugwump is hiding from each guess, leaving the player to puzzle out the direction for herself. In a sense, these are not really games at all; there is no way to really lose, only to end up with a lesser or greater total of guesses. One might imagine people competing against one another in the social atmosphere of PCC, but since each game is randomly generated it’s impossible to really know what two scores mean in relation to each other.

Yob’s reaction to these games was, in his own words:

“Eech!!” Each of these games was based on a 10X10 grid in Cartesian co-ordinates and three of them was too much for me. I started to think along the lines of: “There has to be a hide and seek computer game without that (exp. deleted) grid!!” In fact, why not a topological computer game — imagine a set of points connected in some way and the player moves about the set via the interconnections.

A “topological computer game” in which “the player moves about the set via the interconnections.” Starting to sound like something you recognize?

 

Tags: ,

Spring Thing 2011: Wetlands

Wetlands is an entry in what I sometimes call the Myst-alike subgenre of IF. Its story, especially initially, is rather backgrounded in favor of the exploration of an almost deserted environment and the solving of lots of puzzles informed by that unique Myst flavor of semi-magical engineering. At one time, when we were getting a lot more statically plotted puzzlers like this, I might have chaffed more about the lack of innovation here. However, this is one of the things that IF can do really well, and it’s something that gets done seldom enough now that when a really get example comes along, as this largely is, I can put aside my normal story-centeredness and just enjoy it for what it is.

So, in the first paragraph we are informed that our vague goal is to see the “Crystal City,” whatever that is. There follows a whole lot of fiddling about with plumbing and hydraulics because they are there, until we manage about 80% of the points, at which time the backstory comes to us in a rush. That’s not to say, though, that the game is devoid of literary merit. Raubertas does a very good job of evoking a mood of a certain contemplative beauty with her writing without ever seeming to work too hard at doing so. That, combined with the fact that these puzzles are tricky but not overly so, made the game as a whole an oddly relaxing experience for me. Although there is a lot of fiddling and wandering back and forth, Raubertas’s design and storyworld are tight and compact enough that things never start to feel too labored, and the process of gradually discovering what one’s goals actually are is satisfying enough for the persistent to justify a certain lack of direction in the early stages. This sort of balance is tough to bring off, and it’s to Raubertas’s credit that she does it so well.

While the writing is polished and the game certainly shows evidence of testing, there are some glitches here which occasionally made me wonder whether problems I was having were down to puzzles or bugs. Likewise, the writing was sometimes not quite as precise as it might have been; I sometimes felt like Raubertas’s mental vision of some of these intricate contraptions wasn’t quite all there in the words on the screen. In one place this was particularly problematic: a device had a leaky hose, a fact that should have been obvious, but I had to struggle mightily with the parser to finally determine this. Both of the times that I turned to the walkthrough were due to issues like this, places where the storyworld I was seeing and the storyworld that (I realized afterward) Raubertas was seeing just didn’t turn out to be entirely in sync.

Yet while my faith in the game did occasionally waver, it never completely broke, and on the whole I enjoyed my time with it quite a bit. Even the story, while it retains something of the atmosphere of a dream right until the end, does turn out to hinge on an interesting if somewhat underdeveloped little moral quandary. If you catch it when you’re in the right frame of mind, this atmospheric puzzler may just charm and entrance you like it did me.

Score: 7

And since this is the last game in this Spring Thing, perhaps a sentence or two about the competition as a whole is in order. Sometimes these reviews come off more critical than I intend them; it’s always easier to point out flaws than to analyze the many unobtrusive little things that worked in a particular game, after all. While it’s true that there were no games that I was unreservedly delighted with, it’s also true that four of the six were almost bug-free, and one of the remaining two did show plenty of evidence of technical competence only to fall victim to a single silly — but in this case fatal — bug, the kind that can be fixed easily enough. And the writing across the balance of the entrants was up to a similar standard. These things meant that instead of hammering on bugs and grammatical problems I could devote my criticisms to bigger questions of theme and design. Those are much more interesting subjects for me as a reviewer to write about, and hopefully for you to read. So, when I couple this competition with the big Comp from last year, which showed a similar trend, it seems we’re getting somewhere in the IF community, raising the bar, etc. (choose your cliche). And that in turn is a pretty good trend to see.

 
 

Tags:

Spring Thing 2011: The Promise

In one of those odd synchroneities that so often occur around these competitions, this is the second game of Spring Thing 2011 to be a work of fantasy aimed at relatively young children, a demographic IF hasn’t really tended to target all that often in the past. Even more surprisingly, the two games are almost of a piece in my mind, succeeding and failing in quite similar ways.

The Promise cast as you as a ten-year-old living in a tiny fishing village where the environment is harsh and cold but the people are kind and warm. In the first of its three acts, you run about the village performing workaday tasks as requested by the various inhabitants: cutting wood and delivering it to the boatmaker, making a candle for your mother, etc. These tasks are so varied and extensive that you’ll quickly get a pretty good idea what Robbie Robertson must have been feeling when he wrote “The Weight.”

Certainly the village could use some more child-safety laws. Some of these chores are more chilling than the evil marauders who show up later:

>saw log
You pull the crank. The saw blades go up and down. Cranking and cranking, the saw blades cut into the birch log, over and over until the entire log has a slab cut from it on one side, then you repeat the process until the once round birch log is now an unevenly cut plank, and sawdust and shavings litter the floor.

The plot begins in earnest only with Act 2, when news comes that those marauders are about to attack the village from the sea, just as virtually all of the men are away on a hunt. And so you are pressed into service, given responsibilities which, if out of keeping with anything anyone is ever likely to entrust a real ten-year-old with, are certainly well in keeping with children’s literature of this tradition.

All in all, The Promise is a very competent game, an enjoyable enough way to spend an evening. As with The Lost Islands of Alabaz, however, it fails to become a really compelling experience due not so much to any one or two major failings as a number of low-key niggles and questionable decisions.

For instance, the writing, while grammatical and even polished in its way, doesn’t quite sing like it might. I think I know what atmosphere Mr. Huxter was going for — a stoic Scandinavian beauty, as resplendent as it is desolate — but that doesn’t always come through as well as it might. Sometimes the text seems to be trying too hard, and the reader ends up swimming in a sort of adjective soup. Take the very first sentence of the dream sequence that opens the game: “You are in a wide, seemingly endless flower-filled meadow on a gorgeous summer day.” (When you line up so many adjectives in front of a noun that you have to start inserting commas to separate them, it may be time to have another look at the sentence as a whole — a lesson I too have learned only slowly, painfully, and still incompletely.) At other times — and more problematically — the text becomes little more than lists of compass directions, a problem that is compounded by a somewhat sprawling storyworld with plenty of rooms that only serve as connections.

And there are other design decisions that are perhaps questionable, or simply not quite implemented as well as they might be. In light of that sprawling storyworld, the attractive map that Huxter includes in the game itself is much appreciated — yet his choice to display said map inline with the main text rather than in a separate window is a bit annoying, forcing the player as it does to constantly scroll back to consult it. His choice to suddenly increase the maximum score every time the player seems to be nearing the end of the game, meanwhile, is not so much annoying as just kind of odd.

But these things — all of them, really — are just niggles. My biggest complaint comes with the ending. During the middle part of the game, you make a promise to a certain, let’s just say, “entity” not to visit a certain location in the forest outside of the village ever again, a promise prompted by some errors of judgment your father made with regard to said entity. In the context of this fantasy mileau, that’s all fair enough. At the climax of the game, however, the village finds itself in desperate straits thanks to the marauders who have now landed and started on their work of raping and pillaging. The only possiblilty of hope for you, your mother, and the entire village lies in that place you promised not to visit. Now, given these circumstances I know what I would do: I’d break my promise without a second thought, throw myself at the feet of the entity, explain my desperate situation, and hope for the best. I like to think that most reasonable people would do the same. Yet, incredibly, this game expects you to “keep your promise” even if it means watching the village burn and everyone die. In its last sentence it solemnly informs us that, “Today you have learned the true value of a promise.” That’s just… well, that’s just fucked up. It’s not only jarring, it’s downright disturbing. If I had a child, this is exactly the sort of rigid thinking I’d want to teach him to avoid. It’s thinking just like this that has caused incalculable pain and death and destruction in our world, all in the service of some inflexible code of conduct laid down in a religious text, a solemn oath, or a samurai code. It’s unfortunate that this is the message the game chooses to conclude with, without a hint of irony or equivocation.

Like Alabaz, then, we have here a solid game that has an unfortunate element of (what strikes me as) moral tone-deafness. And also like Alabaz, I’m not entirely sure whether that’s down to genuine differences of belief between me and the author or merely an author who didn’t think through all of the ramifications of his story as well as he might. Which doesn’t erase its genuine strengths or mean you shouldn’t play it, of course. Just be prepared to be left scratching your forehead — or banging it on your desk — at that ending.

Score: 6

 

Tags:

Stiffy Makane: Whateverthehellcyntosis

This game is either called Stiffy Makane: Apocolocyntosis or Mentula Macanus; it can’t quite seem to decide which. While I’m sure there’s some sort of obscure Latin-derived meaning for this apparent confusion that would leave me smugly chuckling into my professorial beard if I were a brighter sort, I’m afraid I’m like Shakespeare in having “little Latin and less Greek.” So, we’ll just call this one Stiffy.

Stiffy, then, is a sprawling old-school piece — the most old-school yet in what has so far been a surprisingly old-school competition — set in a Free Love version of ancient Rome which would shock even HBO. Two reviewers whose opinions I respect a lot, Sam Kabo Ashwell and Emily Short, both compared it to Graham Nelson’s classic Curses. I can certainly understand where they’re coming from in doing this. What I can’t understand is their actually liking this game; I hated it with a passion.

Stiffy considers itself, amongst other things, funny. Now, humor in IF is always a hit-or-miss proposition for me. For every comedy game that makes me laugh, there are several that only make me impatient. I’m afraid Stiffy falls into the latter category — but the way that it fails to amuse me is rather unusual. Most funny IF is kind of friendly and self-conscious about it. “I really, really want you to have a good time,” it says, “but I just don’t know quite how to overcome this or that limitation, so instead I’ll make a joke about it and maybe, instead of you being annoyed with me, we can laugh together… maybe?” Even when it fails — and it usually does — this sort of humor means well. After all, it wants to make me laugh. How bad could that be?

Stiffy‘s humor, however, is of the smug, condescending stripe. It has neither the lusty good spirit of a Shakespeare nor the angry satirical edge of a Swift. It doesn’t laugh with me, doesn’t challenge me; it smirks at me. The very best humorists are moralists at heart, laughing to keep from crying at the inanities of the world. But this game has no capacity for moral concern or outrage. In fact, it has no capacity for any real and human emotion. And so what we’re left with is a thin gruel of tedious intellectualism — and of course lots of sex that wants to be transgressive but isn’t. It’s just boring. It’s the “edgy” kid at university who enrolls in Human Sexuality 101 and walks around with a battered copy of The Story of O but has no clue how to actually get it on with anyone.

Graham Nelson has influenced my thinking and writing to an extent that is almost embarrassing to admit. One thing I love about his style, whether it’s in Curses or Jigsaw or those endless asides and digressions in the old Inform Designer’s Manual, is the way that it refuses to confine itself to a single intellectual sphere. Nelson is a much smarter and more educated man than I, and he doesn’t hesitate to share his erudition in virtually everything he writes. Yet he has the peculiar genius of making all of his esoteric knowledge inspiring and interesting, of never making his reader feel like he is showing off just for the sake of it. It was many years in happening, but the fact that I spent the last half of last year reading the whole of In Search of Lost Time is really down to that vignette of Proust I experienced in Jigsaw a long time ago. It sounds trite, but I feel I’m a better person for having read Nelson, if only because through Nelson I came to Proust.

Stiffy, while I suppose it reflects almost equal erudition, doesn’t inspire me at all. Its self-satisfied tone and sparse, brittle storyworld only awakens long-dormant anti-intellectual biases I didn’t even know I had any longer. (Anti-intellectualism is of course a birthright of every American.) This is IF as it might be written by the father from The Squid and the Whale: the professor for whom A Tale of Two Cities is “minor Dickens,” who cannot think of a stronger adjective of praise than “dense,” and yet is still even more pathetically desperate for a blow job from the local hottie than is his son. This is art with all of the magic of life boiled away, leaving behind just a residue of formal logic and literary references.

Objectively, this is the most polished and complete of any of the games I’ve played so far in this Spring Thing; certainly it would seem to realize all of its design goals beautifully. Subjectively, however, those goals are so antithetical to everything I enjoy about IF or, indeed, art in general that I can’t bear to give it a very good score. So, we’ll start with a nice neutral 5, then subtract 2 because it pissed me off so fucking much. Your mileage may vary.

Score: 3

 
 

Tags: